Hillcrest Platte County
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 320073248
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Riverside, MO, USA
- Phone
- 8163823422
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Homeless Shelters
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,678,093
- Expenses
- $5,921,350
- Assets
- $12,216,335
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
People named in this filing
- CATHERINE KOLKOSKI (VOTING BOARD)
- JENNIFER BEUTEL (VOTING BOARD)
- MARK HARPST (VOTING BOARD)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Assist in moving families to self-sufficiency by providing rent free, utility free housing and classes on budgeting, life skills and employment. Significant revenue results from thrift store operations that are used for the program.
What it reported doing in 2024
The hillcrest thrift shop began as a way to restore dignity to the furnishing of recent hpc graduates new stable homes. The shop quickly expanded to address clothing needs of the families we serve, as well as the community at large. During the recent lock down of businesses, the health department deemed the shop an essential business because of the insecurely housed population we serve. The shop has also served outside our own ministry. Two of our biggest partners, to whom we give tens of thousands in vouchers for their clients, are synergy services and day of hope. Our clearance outlet, which has not turned a profit since it opened, also serves the chronically homeless. We provide clothing and coats and whatever would make their lives easier. Another program that is run through the shop is the employment of program participants who have lost their jobs, and includes disadvantaged individuals. We have worked with the farmers house as well as full employment council.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 67% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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 the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and some filed totals do not add up.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 67
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 78
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 60.2%; rating input score 60
- Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 22.9%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 60.2% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $4.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 24 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.