Indianapolis Parks Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351860468
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3173408024
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,567,683
Expenses
$1,934,575
Assets
$1,280,090
Liabilities
$171,495

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Blake Johnson (Interim President & CEO (Beginning 09/24))
  • Rusty Carr (President & CEO (End 09/24))

Highest reported compensation

  • Rusty Carr (President & CEO (End 09/24)): $76,074 total reported compensation
  • Blake Johnson (Interim President & CEO (Beginning 09/24)): $35,409 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The parks alliance is a leader in developing and sustaining indianapolis parks and greenways by connecting resources to needs to better establish and maintain a safe and thriving community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The parks alliance supports the mission of the city of indianapolis department of parks and recreation. The parks alliance's primary mission is to raise funds and serve as an advocate for parks in indianapolis. As part of this mission, the alliance pursues funding opportunities through grants, sportsmanship, and fundraising events that are used to help purchase land, develop new parks, maintain existing parks, upgrade facilities and provide support to numerous programs benefitting children, families and older adults. All residents of marion county benefit from the partnership between the city of indianapolis, department of parks and recreation and the parks alliance. The city of indianapolis, department of parks and recreation annually provide services and facilities to over seven million park visitors.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 60.6%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 47.5%; rating input score 48
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.13 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -23.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 60.6% of revenue deployed · 47.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $919K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $76K · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 48/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.