Lotus Pond
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 332339616
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Sandy, UT, USA
- Phone
- 8017870838
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $68,260
- Expenses
- $60,835
- Assets
- $7,425
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Eugene M Parnell V (President)
- Clinton Uytenbogaardt (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Eugene M Parnell V (President)
- Clinton Uytenbogaardt (Vice President)
- Rupesh N Patel EA (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Lotus Pond Foundation believes that martial arts is more than just physical training. Its a pathway to personal growth, confidence, and resilience. The goal is to make martial arts accessible to everyone, regardless of financial circumstances, by providing scholarships that cover training, equipment, and competition costs.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2025, the Lotus Pond Foundation rallied with the community to help provide life-changing opportunities for 46 children and adults who dreamed of training in martial arts but could not afford the cost. This effort isnt just about covering class fees. Its about opening doors to confidence, discipline, resilience, and a safe, supportive environment where members of the community can grow.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 92
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 88.3%; rating input score 88
- Program expense ratio: 99.1%; rating input score 99
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.9%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 88.3% of revenue deployed · 99.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $60K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.