Kansas City Anti Violence Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
770595867
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8167019984
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Sexual Abuse, Prevention

Reported finances

Revenue
$243,088
Expenses
$284,330
Assets
$27,384
Liabilities
$168,028

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Melissa Brown (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Melissa Brown (Executive Director): $53,580 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide advocacy services to LGBTQ victims and survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, and hate crimes.

What it reported doing in 2020

The Kansas City Anti-Violence Project (KCAVP) was able to positively represent the LGBTQ+ community throughout 2020. (A) Sack Lunch Drive- KCAVP provides hot and cold lunches to community members during the pandemic, via curb-side pickup and home delivery, 2100 served (B) COVID kits- KCAVP provides COVID response kits (toilet paper, cleaning supplies, sanitizer, masks, gloves) to community members, 450 kits provided to date (C) Memorial services-Provided balloons, gift cards, and supported with services for Aerrion Burnett (D) Provided support to over 150 clients needing food, medication, transportation, and utility support. (E) Sponsored Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR) dinner organized by UpLift (F) Facilitated TDOR events with Kansas City Center for Inclusion and Zeke's Freedom Foundation (G) Provided safety support (medical safety supplies, food, staff provided safety planning and supported nurses and med techs on the ground) during Black Lives Matter events (H) Worked with the KC symphony to donate 40 quilts to LGBTQ youth and families (I) Organized Virtual LGBTQ Youth Holiday Party

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 70% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 12
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.9%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd 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: 97%; rating input score 97; 54th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: -17%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 6.14; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $247K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $54K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 25 of 25 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2010 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.

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 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.