Kc Estates Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481179781
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Wichita, KS, USA
Phone
3169424848
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,099
Expenses
$103,548
Assets
$127,121
Liabilities
$31,101

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BYRON ADRIAN (PRESIDENT)
  • ANGELA MENDOZA (PRESIDENT)
  • CHUCK GRABER (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • DEBBIE HOLMES (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BYRON ADRIAN (PRESIDENT)
  • ANGELA MENDOZA (PRESIDENT)
  • CHUCK GRABER (VICE-PRESIDENT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

K.c. Estates, inc was organized to construct, own and operate a 9 unit apartment community in wichita, Kansas, known as kc estates, pursuant to section 811 of the national affordable housing act, as amended. The corporation has executed a regulatory agreement and project rental assistance contract with the department of housing and urban development.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pursuant to section 811 of the national affordable housing act, as amended. The corporation has executed a regulatory agreement and project rental assistance contract with the department of housing and urban development.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 61% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and assets have declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 91
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.3%; rating input score 77

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -30.9%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -7.5% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $80K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.