Kidney Care Partners Inc Co Federal Health Policy Strategies

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
030520188
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024788188
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Kidney Disease

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,739,538
Expenses
$1,726,858
Assets
$2,370,049
Liabilities
$1,365,821

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

People named in this filing

  • HOLLY BODE (AMERICAN KIDNEY)
  • GENE BLANKENSHIP (DIALYSEDIRECT)
  • BILL POIRIER (RENAL HEALTH)

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

To promote the common good and general welfare of all americans by 1)promoting responsible government practices through public policies that assure high quality kidney care treatment for people who have advanced kidney disease, 2)promoting responsible and efficient medicare reform relating to dialysis and to ensure patients have access to quality of care.

What it reported doing in 2024

Kidney care partners primary activites are to promote quality renal care and to improve reimbursement for end stage renal disease (esrd) patients in the us. In 2022, kcp also sought to improve policies and payment for new technologies in the esrd system. Kcp activities include outreach to health & human services, the center for medicare services, the white house, medpac, congress and other agencies as required. We undertake grassroots activities, public education and awareness, marketing, lobbying and other advocacy activities. Our core activites focus on infuencing medicare policies related to payment and quality measurement for the esrd program. We primarily work with the congress and hhs/cms on these efforts seeking to improve various aspects of the esrd payment system, research, search quality measurement, license and certification of esrd facilities, medicare advantage payment and benefit design and coverage, and access to coverage for esrd beneficiaries in the private sector. Our efforts require advocacy resources as well as analysis of government and private sector data. We target key leadership in the house, senate, wh, hhs, cms, and other agencies. We formulate communmity comments on proposed solutions and legislative ero proposals as well as advancing our own community legislative and regulatory policy.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 58
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.37; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -92.3% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 35 of 35 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 30 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.