Pocketparks
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 861627313
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2021
- Location
- Saint Louis, MO, USA
- Phone
- 6365560565
- Rating
- 41
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Parks and Playgrounds
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,822
- Expenses
- $30,201
- Assets
- $10,482
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Samantha Smugala (President)
- Sarah Arknosky Ko (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Samantha Smugala (President)
- Sarah Arknosky Ko (Vice President)
- Katie Holtgrave (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
Recreational Development
What it reported doing in 2025
Pocketparks contributed to 6 different projects and 4 permanent parks (including The DUC Park, 2 Acre Park, West End Park, and Ratio Park).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
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: -155.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.35; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -28.5% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -63% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -54.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 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 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.