Bright Futures Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
461012192
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8167142319
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,573,656
Expenses
$10,578,590
Assets
$7,666,153
Liabilities
$3,049,990

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • M GAIL SUMMERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • ANGELA LAVILLE (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $194,993 total reported compensation
  • M GAIL SUMMERS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $50,069 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To offer positive education opportunities to youth in a safe, value-centered environment, and for such other purposes as permitted by law.

What it reported doing in 2024

Grants are provided to three inner city schools within the catholic diocese of Kansas city-st. Joseph. This enables the schools to provide scholarships/financial assistance to families to enable children to receive a catholic education. The funds also support the operating costs of the two schools. A small portion of the funds provides scholarships for families to attend select catholic schools where families need some assistance to remain in the schools. All schools are tax exempt and follow educational guidelines required by state and federal standards as well as the teachings of the catholic church.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 76% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 77% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 95
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.9%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.3%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 17th 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: 80.5%; rating input score 81; 17th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -0%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.3%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.8% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.8% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.9% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.9% of revenue deployed · 98.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $10.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $195K · 10 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 28 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.