Mcpherson County Council on Aging

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
480854819
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Mcpherson, KS, USA
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$611,073
Expenses
$611,341
Assets
$122,294
Liabilities
$25,308

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANITA JOST (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • TERRY BOLTE (ADMINISTRATOR)
  • MARY ELLWOOD (BOARD MEMBER)
  • JIM TOEWS (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Elderly information and referral service. Provide programs, technical assistance and supportservice such as grant writing to senior centers in mcpherson county Kansas

What it reported doing in 2025

Federal transit administration sec. 5311 program funds (formerly sec. 18) disbursements: the organization disburses program funds of sec. 5311 to the senior centers in mcpherson county. These funds are to be used for public transportation projects serving rural areas. Title iii funds are disbursed to the senior centers in mcpherson county to cover the cost of wages. Mill levy funding is received and disbursed to the senior centers in mcpherson county to assist with operations and staffing

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 66% for direct work, and 34% for member benefits.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 7th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.2; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $611K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.