Kc Common Good Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 834482500
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Kansas City, MO, USA
- Phone
- 8166011006
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Employment Procurement Assistance
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,995,848
- Expenses
- $1,247,291
- Assets
- $1,391,088
- Liabilities
- $14,623
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KLASSIE ALCINE (President)
Highest reported compensation
- KLASSIE ALCINE (President): $159,103 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to create an environment where all citizens can live safely and have access to real opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Working for Youth is programming that focuses on creating and expanding safe, pro-social environments for Kansas City young people. Starting in 2021, KC Common Good launched a paid summer internship program, creating a pipeline of diverse talent into Kansas City area employers. Since that time, KC Common Good has elevated interns and programs with young people from communities most impacted by violence and justice-proximate juveniles. During 2024, the Organization aligned 10 community-based, youth-serving organizations to expand the number and capacity of pro-social activities for young people, ages 5-19, during the summer. Programming that ran from June through August served 592 young people, increasing partnering organizations' capacity by 22 percent. KC Common Good provided technical assistance and deployed more than $400K from a City of KCMO Health Department contract.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 59% for direct work, and 41% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 64
- Transparency & Controls: 74
- Accountability: 93
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 51.8%; rating input score 52
- Program expense ratio: 82.7%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $28.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 86.2%; rating input score 86; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 96%; rating input score 96; 26th 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: Pass
- 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: 37.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 30.6% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 40.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 51.8% of revenue deployed · 82.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 25 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 25 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.