Becoming Stronger

← Portfolio

Giving guide · August 2026

The Kansas City Effective Giving Guide

Where a marginal Kansas City dollar actually goes. Around forty local organizations vetted GiveWell-style against the metro's highest-impact causes: does each one deliver a proven intervention, and does it show its work? Verified financials, evidence grades, transparency grades, and the four causes where no giving vehicle exists at all.

Every organization was assessed on a uniform instrument: identity and financials verified against IRS filings (never search results); intervention match against the cost-effectiveness evidence from part 2 (awareness campaigns and galas explicitly don't count); an A–F evidence grade; an outcome-transparency grade; and room for funding. Grades measure fit and transparency, not whether an org's people are good; several downgraded organizations do valuable work outside this frame.

Part 1 · Burden of disease Part 2 · The ITN ranking Part 3 · The giving guide

Tier 1: give with confidence

Evidence-matched, financially verified, and sized (or gapped) so a marginal gift matters. One organization earns two slots.

Cancer screening + hypertension

Samuel U. Rodgers Health Center

The only org in this study with peer-reviewed published outcomes: its patient-navigation program raised colorectal screening from 31% to 59%. Also one of nine national CDC-funded self-measured blood pressure pilot sites. Restrict gifts to navigation/SMBP, and give to the health center itself, not its dormant foundation entity.

EIN 43-0899356 · $31.9M revenue (FY23)

Overdose

First Call

Confirmed street-level naloxone, fentanyl test strip, and overdose-response training delivery across both states, at a size where a gift is a real fraction of budget, and with a dated concrete gap: its joint federal harm-reduction grant expired May 2025.

EIN 44-0641486 · $4.1M revenue (FY23)

firstcallkc.org

Elderly falls

Shepherd's Center of KC Central

Delivers A Matter of Balance (a named, evidence-based falls program) in-house, with a live class schedule, and has run three straight years of operating deficits: a demonstrated funding gap in the most actionable top cause. Ask what share of a gift reaches the falls program.

EIN 43-0994417 · $1.6M revenue (FY23)

kcshepherdscenter.org

Road traffic

BikeWalkKC

The advocacy engine behind the one traffic lever proven to work here: Complete Streets (2017), the GO bond's street money, Vision Zero's adoption, and a seat on its task force while city traffic deaths fell 102 to 68. By its own admission, advocacy is its hardest work to fund.

EIN 45-3832438 · $1.2M revenue (FY23)

The full registry

Every organization that made it to a grade (18 of ~40 assessed; the rest failed identity, locality, or relevance screens). Causes appear in ITN rank order so you can see which have vehicles and which sit empty; switch to the tier view for a straight recommendation list. Evidence grades: A = delivers a named proven intervention with fidelity signals; B = proven model, fidelity or currency unresolved; C = adjacent services or awareness work; F = disqualifying. Transparency: does the org publish outcomes, not activity counts. Expand any row for the reasoning.

Where nothing exists to fund: the create-it list

Four of the fifteen causes, including the #1-ranked one, have no clean local giving vehicle. These are the biggest openings for a funder or organizer who wants to build rather than give.

Tobacco cessation (the #1 cause). The state quitline is run by a Denver nonprofit under government contract; the one local clinical cessation program's page is dead. Nearest moves: confirm whether Swope Health's "Resolve to Stop Smoking" still operates, or vet Tobacco Free Missouri as a state-advocacy bet against Missouri funding tobacco control at 7.4% of the CDC-recommended level.
Full-model CAPABLE falls prevention with public reporting. One unadvertised CAPABLE site exists inside a $75M hospice organization. A funder could underwrite the CAPABLE National Center's training pathway for a KC host that already has the adjacent infrastructure.
A charitable on-ramp to Project RISE. The hospital-based violence intervention at University Health is the best-evidenced violence program in the region, and it is tax-funded with no earmark pathway at the hospital foundation. One phone call could change that.
An independent evaluation of SAVE KC. Its self-reported numbers are internally inconsistent across its own press coverage, and KC's last focused-deterrence program (KC NoVA) posted celebrated early numbers before decaying to an official Ineffective rating. Funding rigorous outside evaluation before scale-up is worth more than funding programming.

The donor-deployability asymmetry. Tobacco ranks #1 in the ITN analysis but has nothing to fund without building the channel first. Falls ranks #3 and has a starving, evidence-matched vehicle accepting money today. "Best cause" and "best gift you can make this month" are different questions, and this guide answers the second.

The phone-call list

Five facts a person with a phone can resolve that no amount of remote research could. Each one would firm up a Tier 2 recommendation.

YMCA of Greater KC (816-561-9622): what is your diabetes-prevention program's CDC recognition tier? Full recognition means it hit CDC's outcome thresholds and moves to Tier 1.
Swope Health (816-923-5800): does "Resolve to Stop Smoking" still operate, and what is your HRSA-reported hypertension-control rate?
KC CARE Health Center: what is the syringe program's current status and scale? (The widely-cited 750,000-needles figure is 2018 reporting.)
University Health Foundation: can a gift be designated to Project RISE?
Midland Care Connection: can a gift be restricted to the Overland Park CAPABLE site, and will you publish its outcomes?

What the vetting revealed about Kansas City

KC's nonprofits are a transparency desert. Almost nobody publishes outcome data. No safety-net clinic posts its blood-pressure control rate (all report it to the federal government privately); no harm-reduction org publishes reversal counts; no violence org has independently evaluated results. Transparency graded Opaque or Partial across nearly the entire field, and fixing that is itself a philanthropic opportunity.
The best-evidenced interventions are government-run and cannot take your money. Nurse-Family Partnership is the health department. The crisis system is the county. The falls classes run through the Area Agencies on Aging. For several causes, the strongest move is civic advocacy, not a check.
One organization clears the bar twice. Samuel U. Rodgers Health Center is the only org with peer-reviewed outcomes and holds a national pilot role in a second cause. It advertises neither. The correlation between marketing volume and evidence quality in this field is approximately zero.
The vetting fed back into the rankings. Three neglectedness scores moved (falls down, tobacco and overdose up); re-running the Monte Carlo left the headline ranking unchanged and swapped only the factor-product view's #1 and #2, inside the published intervals. The part 2 page carries the update.

Method and limits

Financials come from IRS Form 990 filings via ProPublica's API, mostly FY2023; functional-expense detail was not audited, top-lines only. Program claims were verified on each organization's own pages or primary documents; every unverified item in the underlying research is labeled rather than asserted. "Opaque" means no public outcomes were found, not that none exist internally. Candid/GuideStar transparency seals were not systematically pulled. These are transparency-and-fit audits, not independent program evaluations: they establish whether the model is proven and whether the organization shows its work, not whether its KC implementation is working. On syringe services: Kansas bans them outright; Missouri provides no statutory authorization, yet the metro's one exchange has historically operated openly, so the reality is local tolerance without legal protection.

Built with a multi-agent research pipeline I direct, over the burden model (part 1) and cost-effectiveness evidence (part 2) of this series. Grades are structured judgment over verified evidence, stated so you can disagree with them precisely.