Mid-america Regional Council Community Services Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201824454
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8164744240
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,864,698
Expenses
$6,214,549
Assets
$669,279
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID WARM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID WARM (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $284,573 total reported compensation
  • FRANK LENK (DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH SERVICES): $221,962 total reported compensation
  • CAROL GONZALES (DIRECTOR OF FINANCE & ADMIN): $215,596 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Marc csc administers collaborative programs that benefit Kansas city area communities. This includes programs supporting early learning initiatives, poverty studies, workforce development, healthcare and other regional initiatives.

What it reported doing in 2024

The regional housing partnership (rhp), a partnership between marc and lisc of greater Kansas city, receives grants from local philanthropic organizations to support the work of community organizations and local governments across the region in producing and preserving more housing, maintain a housing search tool called kchousinglocator.com, and assist other agencies with applying for funding at the federal, state, and local level. The rhp began convening a strategy committee of local housing experts in 2022 that spend time applying system's thinking principles to regional housing issues, creating innovative solutions for addressing the housing shortage.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.5%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 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: 9.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $285K · 26 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.