Crossroads Community Services
Legal name: Crossroads Community Services Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 472676714
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Dallas, Texas, US
- Phone
- (214) 560-2511
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Food Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $29,644,712
- Expenses
- $29,185,653
- Assets
- $7,063,073
- Liabilities
- $571,527
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BENAYE WADKINS CHAMBERS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- BENAYE WADKINS CHAMBERS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $174,247 total reported compensation
- CYNTHIA THOMPSON (VP, DEVELOPMENT & STRATEGIC IMPLEMENTATION): $121,342 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide vital resources to families in need.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community market overview - crossroads seeks to ensure that all people in dallas county consistently have access to nutritious food through our in-house community market. Our shoppers receive an average of 120 pounds of food during their monthly visit to our community market. Crossroads inhouse community market partners with academic institutions to better understand the broader impact of food insecurity and food assistance on the well-being of our shoppers through our unique survey and order process. We also partner with community resource partners to ensure that our shoppers have access to the additional resources needed to support their journey to household and financial stability. On average, our in-house community market serves 56 households a day, five days a week and sees about 250-260 households per week. Our goal is to ensure that our clients have a dignified experience from the moment they walk into our doors to the time they load their groceries into their car.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 92% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 93.9%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
- Fundraising efficiency: $61.04 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- 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: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 1.5%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.24; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 93.9% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $27.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 21 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 39 of 40 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 133 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 128 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.