Cultivate Kansas City Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 202365320
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Kansas City, MO, USA
- Phone
- 9138312444
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Agricultural Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,988,254
- Expenses
- $1,823,899
- Assets
- $979,128
- Liabilities
- $254,487
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRIEN DARBY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- BRIEN DARBY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $104,673 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Grow food, farms and community in support of a sustainable, healthy and local food system.
What it reported doing in 2024
Juniper gardens training farm operates the new roots for refugees program in partnership with catholic charities of ne Kansas. Cultivate kc provides land, infrastructure and development support to help refugee families start and run their own small farm businesses. Cultivate kc manages community gardens on site and provides knowledge and technical support to other nearby gardens and farms. Each year, 16-17 participants and their families are trained. By increasing farmers, vegetable farms, and healthy foods in low-income neighborhoods, the training farm helps to change the environmental context to make healthy fruits and vegetables readily available for residents of these communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 84% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.7%; rating input score 73
- Program expense ratio: 79.3%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $12.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 91.3%; rating input score 91; 39th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.8% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.7% of revenue deployed · 79.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 15 people listed
- Consistency: 35 of 36 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 58/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.