Matthew 19 14

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
812414216
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Overland Park, KS, USA
Phone
9133627223
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Specialized Education Institutions
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$878,052
Expenses
$511,380
Assets
$1,093,142
Liabilities
$24,674

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kim Hammers (Executive Director)
  • James J Kernell (President and Chairman)
  • Amy Dunn (Vice President, 7/1/24-8/31/24)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kim Hammers (Executive Director): $94,850 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of EMBRACE is to provide the opportunity for an inclusive education by supporting children with disabilities and learning differences in their Catholic schools.

What it reported doing in 2024

SPED Endorsement Program at Benedictine College: Provided Special Education Endorsement Program and Masters Degree scholarships. EMBRACE continued to provide full scholarships to 19 current ArchKCK teachers for 5-6 semesters depending on each student's opportunity and timing for student teaching. Additionally, we awarded 10 more teachers full tuition for a masters program beginning in FY 25/26. The SPED Endorsement Program at Benedictine shifted to a Masters Degree in Special Education beginning FY 24/25. Paid $48,390 in 24/25

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.3%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 86.6%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $23.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.8%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.14; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18.5%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.1% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.3% of revenue deployed · 86.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $443K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $95K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 44 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.