North Carolina State Park Partners Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
874197562
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
9198103436
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$474,967
Expenses
$2,619
Assets
$1,494,649
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Michael Murphy (President)
  • Margaret Birkemeier (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Michael Murphy (President)
  • Margaret Birkemeier (Vice President)
  • Carol Tingley (Secretary)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of North Carolina State Park Partners Foundation created and incorporated in late 2021 is to enable people to make meaningful and lasting gifts to support North Carolinas State Park system helping to ensure the parks remain accessible vibrant and protected for years to come.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Foundation conditionally granted 1 million in November 2025 to the N.C. Division of Parks and Recreation to acquire nearly 3,700 acres at Hickorynut Mountain in the N.C. foothills. This grant is earmarked for the NC Division of Parks and Recreation to aid in the land acquisition in western North Carolina specifically for the Hickorynut Mountain conservation project. It underscores our dedication to environmental preservation and sustainable land use. The release of these funds hinges on the state meeting specified conditions including securing ample matching funds within two years. Once these requirements are met the funds will be expensed and managed following our financial procedures.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 20
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 93
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0.6%; rating input score 1
  • Program expense ratio: 59.2%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 99.4%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 570.69; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -46.9% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -70.5% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 39.8% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0.6% of revenue deployed · 59.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 1/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.