Janas Campaign Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263633159
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Hays, KS, USA
Phone
7856560324
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Spouse Abuse, Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$253,218
Expenses
$290,719
Assets
$73,691
Liabilities
$3,886

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CURT BRUNGARDT (Vice President)
  • KEEGAN NEWKIRK (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAITLYN BLACKBURN (Executive Dir.): $66,125 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Jana's Campaign's mission is to provide quality educational programming that prevents gender and relationship violence. Working through secondary schools, colleges and universities, and community-based organizations and agencies, Janas Campaign delivers specialized prevention strategies and curricula that are designed to prevent violence, build healthy relationships, and create new social norms.Partnering with other advocates, activists, victims, the criminal justice system and lawmakers, Jana's Campaign seeks to reduce and respond to gender violence by pursuing a strategy built on five program areas. Through public awareness and community action; education; prevention and intervention; public policy advocacy; campus action; and engaging men and boys to reduce gender violence, the Campaign's goal is to play a significant role and be a catalyst for real change.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% 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.

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: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.4%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 46.5%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $25.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.8%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.25; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.4% of revenue deployed · 46.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $135K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $66K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 14/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.