Lifecare Planning Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431459198
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8169311313
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Family Planning Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$26
Expenses
$2,145
Assets
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG REAVES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • CRAIG REAVES (PRESIDENT)
  • EILEEN WIRTZ (SECRETARY)
  • RONALD WAGNER (TREASURER)

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

To provide specific services to assist parents of developmentally disabled citizens to develop, implement, and maintain long-term plans for the care of their child.

What it reported doing in 2015

To serve families and their sons/daughters who have a disability by educating them as the the need to do long term planning - wills, trusts, guardianship, dpoas, ssi and medicaid eligibility, and eligibility for services through systems like the department of mental health. We also acted as the advocate for a number of individuals whose parents are deceased.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

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: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 7
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 43.4%; rating input score 43

Transparency & Controls

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

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8,150%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st 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: -12.6% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -25.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -25.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 43.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $931 in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 43/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.