Trinity Park Conservancy
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 202948236
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2147401616
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,741,851
- Expenses
- $5,706,232
- Assets
- $118,962,744
- Liabilities
- $26,265,817
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
39 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Anthony Moore (President & CEO)
- Marguerite Hoffman (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Anthony Moore (President & CEO): $374,890 total reported compensation
- Brian Kilpatrick (COO): $286,422 total reported compensation
- John Trahan (CFO): $245,564 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Trinity Park Conservancy champions the transformation of the Trinity River to become the heart of Dallas. With the community, the Conservancy will design public spaces that unite us, enrich people's lives through access to nature, create economic development opportunities, and inspire protection for the river ecosystems in this shared natural treasure.
What it reported doing in 2025
Stewardship of Dallas' largest public green space, the 10,000 acres of the Trinity River. Developing parks along the Trinity River beginning with Harold Simmons Park. Education and engagement about the Trinity River, economic development and nature. Advocacy for a connected and equitable Dallas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 86% 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
SUPPORTED - 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 the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 34
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 82
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 7.6%; rating input score 8
- Program expense ratio: 67.1%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: $53.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 17.5%; rating input score 18; 8th 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 89.4%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.85; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 34.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 24% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 7.6% of revenue deployed · 67.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $375K · 39 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $13M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 33 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 8/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.