Connecting for Good

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
453684984
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8165597077
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$855,402
Expenses
$637,618
Assets
$27,385
Liabilities
$44

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Thomas Esselman (CEO)
  • Michael Levine (President)
  • Dr Barbara Lach (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Thomas Esselman (CEO): $35,024 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to ensure that every resident of Kansas City's urban core, regardless of income, has access to the digital skills, computers, and internet service vital for education and employment success in today's digital world. We support Kansas City as one of the leading metropolitan communities in the U.S. for digital inclusion. We also align with the core values of the KC Chamber of Commerce: Growth, Prosperity, Inclusion, and Regionalism. The outcomes we care most about are: Kindergarten Readiness; Workforce Development; Health and Wellness; and Thriving Urban Neighborhoods

What it reported doing in 2020

Digital literacy training, including the provision of free tax preparation services on wifi-enabled computers, is Connecting for Good's (CFG) biggest program. Operated throughout 2020 in one primary location: 3210 Michigan Avenue in Kansas City, Missouri; with tech support to other IRS-approved sites for free tax assistance throughout the Kansas City area. CFG provided digital skills services and training to 8,300 individuals in 2020.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 77% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 50
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 43.4%; rating input score 43
  • Program expense ratio: 58.7%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.5%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.04; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 23.9% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 43.4% of revenue deployed · 58.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $375K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $35K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2014 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 43/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.