Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City

Legal name: Shirley & Barnett Helzberg Supporting Foundation C/o Jewish Comm Fndn of GKC

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
481183263
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2017
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2017
Location
Overland Park, KS, United States
Phone
(913) 327-8245
Rating
31
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Voluntarism, and Grantmaking Foundations N.E.C.
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$-269
Expenses
$4,707
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Shirley Helzberg (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lauren M Hoopes (Secretary): $205,753 total reported compensation
  • Kevin Taylor (CFO): $121,733 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote the practice of tzedakah (charity) and the pursuit of tikkun olam (repairing the world) by serving as the advocate for planned giving and the central resource for personalized charitable funds for individuals, families, and organizations in the community. The vision of the Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City is to foster, sustain and ensure a strong and vibrant Jewish community for today and for generations to come. History The Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Kansas City is one of the oldest independent Jewish community foundations in North America. It was created in 1959 "to encourage the contribution of gifts and bequests to assure that the community will continue to be served regardless of economic conditions or changing needs, to enable donors to use available tax planning programs, and to provide an everlasting memorial for the donor or loved one.".

What it reported doing in 2017

Provide support for charitable organizations which serve human needs by advancing constructive projects.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
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 and most voting board members are independent. 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: 60
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 2
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: -1,849.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 838.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -53.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -220.8% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -109.2% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $293K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $206K · 8 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2015 to 2017
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.