The Rabbit HOle

Legal name: The Rabbit Hole Kc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 472324303
IRS 990 coverage: 2015–2025
Official website data refreshed: Sep 2026
Forms available: Form 990 2025
Location: North Kansas City, MO, USA
Phone: 8164927915
Rating: 67
Verdict: SUPPORTED
Rating confidence: Moderate
Sector: Children's Museums
Affiliation: Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue: $4,048,726
Expenses: $4,123,809
Assets: $14,274,673
Liabilities: $4,161,240

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

PETER COWDIN (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
DEBORAH PETTID (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

PETER COWDIN (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $99,327 total reported compensation
DEBORAH PETTID (CO-EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $99,327 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To create a living culture around literature that will nourish, empower, and inspire the reading lives of children and adults. We house a museum, printshop and bindery, bookstore, story and writing labs, a resource library and theater space in our new facility.

What it reported doing in 2025

To create a living culture around literature, accessible to all, that will nourish, empower, and inspire the reading lives of children and adults. The rabbit hole is home to a new museum experience where childrens books come to life, and visitors become explorers in a multi-sensory narrative landscape filled with radically immersive, discoverable environments. In conjunction with the museum, the rabbit hole also houses a printshop and bindery, a full-service bookstore, story and writing labs, a resource library, and a theater space, enabling an abundance of dynamic programming and partnership opportunities that will allow us to reach children and adults of all backgrounds, both inside the rabbit hole and beyond its walls.

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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

Financial Efficiency: 51
Transparency & Controls: 80
Accountability: 79
Sustainability: 42
Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

Mission deployment rate: 60%; rating input score 60
Program expense ratio: 53.1%; rating input score 53
Fundraising efficiency: $1.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Pay-setting controls: Limited
Foreign activity oversight: Limited
Grant itemization coverage: Limited
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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -1.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.46; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 4.8%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: 28% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Revenue growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
Where the money goes: 60% of revenue deployed · 53.1% of spending went to programs
Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.2M in reported program spending
Leadership: top reported pay $99K · 11 people listed
Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
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.

Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 53/100.
High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D expense reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D revenue reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.