Kansas Zen Center
Legal name: Kansas Zen Center Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 481058264
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Lawrence, KS, United States
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Buddhism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,896
- Expenses
- $62,859
- Assets
- $1,314,186
- Liabilities
- $170,098
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jane Gnojek (President)
- Thomas Davis (Vice-President/Facilties)
People named in this filing
- Jane Gnojek (President)
- Thomas Davis (Vice-President/Facilties)
- Wenda Davis (Treasurer)
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
The Center is formed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining public worship and teachings in accordance with the principles and doctrines of the Kwan Um School of Zen. We’ve been here in Lawrence Kansas since 1978. Over time we’ve grown, solidified our practice, and enlarged our offerings. A member of the Kwan Um School of Zen, we were fortunate to have Zen Master Seung Sahn visit us every year for 14 years. Other teachers in the Kwan Um School of Zen visited us regularly as well — even in the early days we were able to sustain three or four retreats a year, which eventually grew to nearly every month. In 2019 we completed the building we currently occupy. Thanks to Zoom, our community has grown to include people from literally all over the world, sustained through hybrid practice. We added a dharma school for kids, are developing a native plant garden tha.
What it reported doing in 2024
Zen practice
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 66% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 6
- Sustainability: 52
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -16.6%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.91; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -25.8% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 11 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $63K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.