Project Independence Incorporated of Sedgwick County

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481115616
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Wichita, KS, USA
Phone
3162626898
Rating
34
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Reported finances

Revenue
$173,417
Expenses
$174,380
Assets
$49,010
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Darla Carra-Denton (Executive Director)
  • Shane Ward (Vice-President)

People named in this filing

  • Darla Carra-Denton (Executive Director)
  • Shane Ward (Vice-President)
  • Janet Wright (Scretary)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Reduce Social Isolation Among Persons Who Are Current and Former Consumers of Mental Heal Services

What it reported doing in 2024

During FY25 Project Independence had: 1040 Open Hours-169 Open Days-169 Unduplicated Members-68 Total Visits. 1,651. 545 members provided peer support. 14 aided members when released from mental hospitals. 7 aided members when released from jail. PI also referred members to other services that included: housing, health and basic daily needs. PI continues to refer members and community membeers to resources such as housing, health, basic daily needs and medical services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.6%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.8% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 15 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.