Kenwood Center Services Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
412016800
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2008
Location
Wayzata, MN, USA
Phone
6123779190
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Health Support Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$19
Expenses
$2,071
Assets
$1,231

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • WALTER BERA (Director)
  • CORDELIA ANDERSON (Director)
  • HILLARY MANNING (Director)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide innovative and comprehensive consultation, training, education, research, therapy and services for organizations, communities, families, couples and individuals struggling with a wide range of psychological, relational, sexual, emotional, chemical and other serious issues.

What it reported doing in 2015

One very part-time coordinator to planned and began clarifying the process and did begin moving kenwood center services, inc., to engage in more research, training, publishing and video streaming in 2015 with goal of increasing our quality of these services and accessibility of training and teaching materials.hired a professional grant writer to help complete a grant to a major foundation as part of goal of helping ktcs grant writing become more professional and effective.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 12.6%; rating input score 13

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10,800%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.59; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.9% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.3% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 12.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $261 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2015
  • 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.

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 — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.