Ascend Dallas

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
750800699
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2149565901
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Young Men's or Women's Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,862,359
Expenses
$5,640,650
Assets
$3,235,893
Liabilities
$1,643,981

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KAREN PERRY ASHMORE (PRESIDENT)
  • KATE ROSE MARQUEZ (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KATE ROSE MARQUEZ (CEO): $331,614 total reported compensation
  • SUSAN SMITHSON (CHIEF STRATEGY OFFICER): $234,239 total reported compensation
  • LAURA LAROCHELLE (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $154,528 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

At ascend dallas we empower women, fight poverty and impact generations.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ascend dallas economic advancement empowers women with the confidence and knowledge needed to make sound financial decisions. With the support and accountability of an ascend dallas financial coach, women develop smart goals to chart their path to financial growth. Clients can join any of our resiliency pathways aimed at personal finance, career growth, business finance and personal wellness. Outcomes show improvements in financial knowledge, savings, credit, debt and income. In fy 24-25, the program reached 2,608 participants.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 79.2%; rating input score 79
  • Program expense ratio: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.8%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.3%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 79.2% of revenue deployed · 81.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $332K · 24 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 21/100.