Dallas Academy Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
611620572
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2145570197
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,410
Expenses
$14,797
Assets
$30,701

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAVID LEWIS (President)
  • PHYLLIS SMITH (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • DAVID LEWIS (President)
  • PHYLLIS SMITH (Vice President)
  • PHILIP KELTON (Treasurer)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide a sustainable mechanism with human and financial capital to positively affect the future of high school students for a lifetime.

What it reported doing in 2016

Securing and managing grant funds for the purpose of purchasing classroom equipment, supplies, and curriculum. Providing funding for field trips, conferences, and teacher professional development. Securing supplies to be used in implementing the Academy Theme(s) for each campus.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93.6%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 40.5%; rating input score 41

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -130.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.07; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -48.4% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93.6% of revenue deployed · 40.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 41/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.