Big Brothers Big Sisters Kansas City

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
436068464
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8165615269
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,211,365
Expenses
$7,605,234
Assets
$20,040,139
Liabilities
$7,664,019

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDY WILTZ (BOARD MEMBER/PRESIDENT)
  • CHRIS EVANS (BOARD MEMBER/VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DANA LEWIS (BOARD MEMBER/VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ERICA JONES (BOARD MEMBER/VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RYAN MANIES (BOARD MEMBER/LEGAL COUNSEL/SECRETARY/VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MICHEAL LAWRENCE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • MICHEAL LAWRENCE (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $291,125 total reported compensation
  • TIFFANY STUCK (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $166,429 total reported compensation
  • ERICA ORF-OSTROSKI (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $165,114 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

It is our mission to help children reach their full potential through professionally supported, long-term, one-to-one friendships with measurable, positive impact. (continued on schedule o)

What it reported doing in 2025

For more than 60 years, big brothers big sisters Kansas city has served the Kansas city area as the region's largest youth mentoring organization. The agency's mission is to create and support one-to-one mentoring relationships that ignite the power and promise of youth. Through its community-based mentoring model, children who want and need a mentor, traditionally youth from one-parent or non-traditional families ("littles"), are thoughtfully matched with caring adult mentors ("bigs") to build positive, lifelong friendships that help empower their potential. (continued on schedule o)

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 49
  • Transparency & Controls: 95
  • Accountability: 93
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.9%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 69.6%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96.2%; rating input score 96; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 42.4%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.64; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.7%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.9% of revenue deployed · 69.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 26 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $5.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $291K · 32 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.