KVC Health Systems

Legal name: Kvc Health Systems Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262516589
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Olathe, KS, US
Phone
(913) 322-4900
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Management & Technical Assistance

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$45,715,264
Expenses
$46,973,592
Assets
$51,311,327
Liabilities
$22,921,128

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JASON HOOPER (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • LONNIE JOHNSON (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CIO)
  • ROBERT EKLOFE (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT INPATIENT OPERATIONS)
  • SUZANNE LOHRBACH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/KVC INSTITUTE)

Highest reported compensation

  • JASON HOOPER (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT/CEO): $453,597 total reported compensation
  • ANH HONG VINH MD (DIRECTOR/EXECUTIVE MEDICAL DIRECTOR): $394,695 total reported compensation
  • ERIN STUCKY (DIRECTOR/COO): $378,703 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To strengthen families, prevent child abuse and neglect, and help children and adults achieve mental wellness.

What it reported doing in 2024

Corporate services: support of kvc behavioral healthcare, inc., kvc behavioral healthcare West Virginia, inc., kvc behavioral healthcare Kentucky, inc., kvc behavioral healthcare Nebraska, inc., kvc hospitals, inc., kvc foundation, inc., kvc behavioral healthcare Missouri, inc. And great circle. Providing general management services. Services include human resources, application software development, it, accounting, data management/quality assurance, marketing and development, facility maintenance, public affairs and conference center services. By combining these common services under one umbrella, kvc health systems, inc. Is able to efficiently and effectively support its subsidiary organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 78% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 51% for direct work, and 49% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 29
  • Transparency & Controls: 96
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 30
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.9%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 32%; rating input score 32
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd 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: -2.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.09; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 42.3% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 5 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 32.9% of revenue deployed · 32% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $454K · 21 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 40/100.