The Kabb Care Collaborative

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455024217
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2020
Forms available
Form 990 2020
Location
Beachwood, OH, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Centers

Reported finances

Revenue
$9,003
Expenses
$11,936
Assets
$64,080
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CHRISTINE BRETZ (DIRECTOR, TR)
  • RACHEL KABB-EFFRON (DIRECTOR, PR)
  • FELICIA PASCULLI (DIRECTOR, VI)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2020. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The kabb care collaborative is established to enable elderly people and their caregivers to access resources that they might not otherwise be able to afford as they cope with issues concerning aging and medical care. These resources will be provided to seniors and their caregivers at no charge. These services include: providing coaching and care advocacy to the elderly and their caregivers; planning for and reacting to the inevitable unforeseen changes in the aging process; preventing risk factors that threaten healthy aging and independence; planning for placement and transfers; identifying appropriate public benefit programs; personalizing a meaningful life care plan; and educating about lesser-known community services.

What it reported doing in 2020

The organization provides elderly management plans to eligible individuals

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 56
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 95.1%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.6%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.37; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -47.1% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -25.8% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 95.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $11K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2017 to 2020
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.