Ku Healthpartners Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481149398
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Kansas City, KS, USA
Phone
9135885277
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Group Health Practice (Health Maintenance Organizations)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$43,470
Expenses
$54,828
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ABIODUN AKINWUNTAN (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID VRANICAR (DIRECTOR): $417,287 total reported compensation
  • SALLY MALISKI: $346,898 total reported compensation
  • ABIODUN AKINWUNTAN (PRESIDENT): $307,753 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide services that promote and support the educational, research and community service endeavors of the university of Kansas school of of health professions.

What it reported doing in 2022

Ku healthpartners offers an audiology clinic. Its purpose is to serve the community's audiology health care needs while providing students with opportunities for clinical experience. The university of Kansas medical center donates both clinical and administrative services to the clinic each year. Under IRS rules, the value of these services is not reported on form 990. The total value of services donated to the clinic for the fiscal year ended june 30, 2022 was 42,369.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

MIXED - 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 42
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 59.5%; rating input score 60
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -26.1%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 336.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -24% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.5% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.8% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.1% of revenue deployed · 59.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $33K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $417K · 15 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2009 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.