Della Lamb Community Services
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 440549931
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Kansas City, MO, USA
- Phone
- 8168428040
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Federated Giving Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,703,443
- Expenses
- $9,552,736
- Assets
- $2,820,356
- Liabilities
- $1,566,138
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- RYAN HUDNALL (EXECUTIVE DI): $108,185 total reported compensation
- MEGAN MCLAUGHLIN (DIRECTOR OF): $87,239 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Della lamb community services exists to empower its clients to meet the challenges of education, employment, and self-sufficiency in an ever- changing world. Its vision is that every individual will be nourished, educated, and supported in an atmosphere of love and respect to permit them to achieve their full potential. Core services include transportation services for the low-income, elderly and disabled, refugee resettlement, early childhood education, youth services, and social services including emergency assistance and holiday events.
What it reported doing in 2024
To involve youth-provide them with opportunities to assert themselves in constructive ways, stimulate their self-awareness and expression, help them avoid illicit substances, teach alternatives to violence and drugs, develop youth leadership, provide pregnancy-prevention activities, encourage/require youth to stay in school for the purpose to graduate high school, and to encourage involvement in higher-education. Total program expenses were 445,619. To provide for basic needs (food, clothing, shelter, etc) through social services, to alleviate stress due to financial difficulties, emergencies, etc on a temporary basis. Total program expenses were 84,337.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 77% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 74% for direct work, and 26% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 85
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.5%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $30.03 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 1.6%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.3; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.56; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -9.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -7.3% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.5% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 13 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.5M reported
- Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.