Milwaukee Parks Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841808645
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4146877166
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,632,617
Expenses
$2,045,552
Assets
$1,050,920
Liabilities
$49,004

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REBECCA STONER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA STONER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $121,341 total reported compensation
  • KELLY MARTYKA (DIRECTOR, DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR): $58,948 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Engage our community in supporting milwaukee county parks to collectively steward a thriving park system.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, milwaukee parks foundation (mpf) continued advancing our mission to collectively steward a thriving park system. We did this through our core strategies: supporting equitable amenities and programs, building community capacity and raising awareness, promoting access and fostering belonging in our parks. Three of the most significant accomplishments include: investing more than $3,300,000 into our parks via projects, programs, and events to build a more vibrant and equitable parks system.specifically more than $1,000,000 was invested directly into parks infrastructure projects including basketball court renovations, trail improvements, tree planting, permanent seating, a new park pavilion, and more.milwauke parks foundation invested more than $129,000 directly into grassroots leaders and organizations supporting parks via activation, especially the parks that have the greatest needs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 72% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 88.7%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 52nd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -25.3%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 42.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 26.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 88.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 23 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.