Bluestem Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461982247
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2014
Location
North Newton, KS, USA
Phone
3162842900
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$698,151
Expenses
$551,830
Assets
$10,669,765
Liabilities
$8,736,563

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES KREHBIEL (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES KREHBIEL (PRESIDENT/CEO): $313,599 total reported compensation
  • JEROL SCHRAG (CFO): $191,853 total reported compensation
  • RYAN GOERING (COO): $138,570 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to have a positive impact on quality of life by promoting lifelong wellness, purpose, choice, genuine connection, and personalized care with christian compassion.

What it reported doing in 2024

Bluestem development is a type ii supporting organization to kidron bethel retirement services, inc. And mennonite board of missions and charities of Kansas, inc. (dba schowalter villa). The mission of bluestem development is to develop vacant real estate into housing for the elderly and to manage the same, all on a not for profit basis.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some related-organization disclosures are missing.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 71%; rating input score 71
  • Program expense ratio: 86.2%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 21%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 19.34; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.82; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 71% of revenue deployed · 86.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $499K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay and related organizations
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 7 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 23/100.