Restart Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
431349378
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone
8168129990
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Homeless Shelters

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,447,949
Expenses
$8,789,896
Assets
$5,081,176
Liabilities
$2,728,104

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Stephanie Boyer (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stephanie Boyer (CEO): $180,419 total reported compensation
  • Russell Petry (CFO): $110,556 total reported compensation
  • Jonathan Roberts (COO): $87,185 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Restarts mission is to empower all people facing or experiencing homelessness by providing housing and services that inspire hope

What it reported doing in 2024

ReStart provides a full continuum of care from emergency shelter to transitional and permanent housing for all members of the community. reStart is a member of the Coalition to end homelessness. reStart also works with private and government organizations to ensure that individuals and families have access to the services they need and for which they are eligible as well as avoid unnecessary duplication of services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 66% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 71% for direct work, and 29% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 89.3%; rating input score 89
  • Program expense ratio: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.2%; rating input score 81; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 89.3% of revenue deployed · 85.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $180K · 14 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $164K reported
  • Consistency: 43 of 46 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 59/100.