North Central-flint Hills Area Agency on Aging Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
480814616
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2023
Location
Manhattan, KS, USA
Phone
7857769294
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$10,644,271
Expenses
$9,838,928
Assets
$6,289,229
Liabilities
$678,459

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JULIE GOVERT-WALTER (EXECUTIVE DI): $99,434 total reported compensation
  • KELSEY PFANNENSTIEL (FISCAL OFFIC): $74,018 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 north central-flint hills area agency on aging, inc. Is a private, non-profit organization that plans, coordinates and sponsors services in 18 counties to enhance the quality and dignity of life for older kansans and their families. The area agency programs and services are partially funded by the older americans act through the Kansas department on aging and voluntary participant contributions. The area agency works in partnership with local and county governments and senior citizens. All services are available without regard to race, color, national origin, sex, age or handicap.

What it reported doing in 2024

Elderly and aging services - provides assessment, case management, outreach, information and assistance, care coordination, and related supportive services to older adults. These services are designed to assist individuals in maintaining independence in their homes and communities and to prevent or delay institutionalization. Approximately 64,000 individuals served.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 61% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.

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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 92.7%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $115.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.6%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.64; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.8%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 92.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $9.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $99K · 19 people listed
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.