Restoration House of Greater Kansas City

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274837279
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Harrisonville, MO, USA
Phone
8167930500
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Rehabilitation

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,147,759
Expenses
$1,282,035
Assets
$5,542,152
Liabilities
$347,241

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jason Alvis (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Jason Alvis (CEO): $68,473 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

ReHope empowers and elevates survivors of human trafficking and sexual exploitation through its faith-based, trauma-informed residence and recovery programs.

What it reported doing in 2025

REHOPE CRISIS STABILIZATION AND FARMS There are more than 40 million persons enslaved in human trafficking around the globe. Human trafficking in all its forms is an enormously complex issue. Its eradication requires a multi-faceted strategy that incorporates many organizations in areas such as prevention awareness and restoration. the KC Metro area continues to grow as a hub for human trafficking in the U.S. Restoration House of Greater Kansas City also known as ReHope began its mission in 2013 as a response to the increasing epidemic of human sex trafficking in the U.S. REHOPE has earned a national reputation, being afforded a national voice toward the healing and restoration of female survivors. R|H is recognized as a leading organization in offering long-term residential housing and the most comprehensive suite of programs and services. ReHope believes the healing and restoration process is a long-term endeavor and necessitates a steady and patient process grounded in mental, emotional, psychological and physical de-programming and re-programming. ReHope's mission entails physically separate safe house facilities with trauma-informed staffs. Restoration House Farms was established 2015 near Harrisonville, Missouri for adult women. The staff provide residents and non-residents with trauma-informed, client-centered services based on best practices and multiple theoretical frameworks, including cognitive behavior therapy and trauma-based relational intervention, for long-term aftercare and reintegration of trafficking and CSE victims/survivors. ReHope provides long-term housing, therapeutic small animal programs, gardening, Christ-centered spiritual development, holistic wellness programs, healing arts, job training and placement, education, trauma-informed counseling and life coaching. ReHope also partners for medical and psychological needs. Most victims served by REHOPE are domestic, however in recent years, some victims were trafficked across borders. In 2025, ReHope Crisis stabilization had 373 total service requests, 30 women served, 11 women referred to long-term programs, and 8 women connected to a safer environment to continue their healing. Volunteers served 3,722 hours. At ReHope Farms there were 369 requests for services, 37 women served residential (w/2 children), 6 women served non-residental, 9 graduates from ReHope's multi-month program, 5 women in school (HS, college, certificate program), 2 graduate high school, 8 women working for ReHope and 5,000 volunteer hours.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
  • 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: 79
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.85 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 53rd 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 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: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.32; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.3% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 77.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $995K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $68K · 10 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $413K reported
  • Consistency: 47 of 47 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 49/100.