Parc Carbondale Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822956219
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Carbondale, IL, USA
Phone
6185295360
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Temporary Housing

Reported finances

Revenue
$26,916
Expenses
$33,906
Assets
$276,416
Liabilities
$4,856

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAKESH CHANDRA (PRESIDENT)
  • SIDHARTH CHANDRA (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • RAKESH CHANDRA (PRESIDENT)
  • ANITA CHANDRA (SECRETARY)
  • SIDHARTH CHANDRA (VICE-PRESIDENT)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Parc foundation was formed to assist in the recovery from drug and alcohol addiction by providing service dogs for individuals while recovering from drug and alcohol addiction and other related assistance for those individuals and sponsor 501(c)(3) tiger sanctuaries.

What it reported doing in 2024

Parc foundation acquired dogs amd began training and care of said future service dogs to be placed for the use of individuals suffering the effects of drug and alcohol abuse and addiction. In addition, the foundation assisted one indivdual surrering from addiction to obtain licensing to resume their medical career. The foundation also made a contribution to the national tiger sanctuary in branson, mo,518 state highway bb, saddlebrooke, mo 65630

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.6%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.2%; rating input score 79; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -26%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.15; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 27.4% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -62.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.