Dallas Bar Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 750758332
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2142207440
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,312,024
- Expenses
- $4,142,228
- Assets
- $7,076,754
- Liabilities
- $1,657,748
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
34 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Alicia Hernandez (Executive Director)
- Sarah Rogers (President Elect)
- Jonathan Childers (President)
Highest reported compensation
- Alicia Hernandez (Executive Director): $298,338 total reported compensation
- Sherri Evans (Controller): $250,705 total reported compensation
- Jessica Smith (Dir-Communication): $124,764 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Dallas Bar Association is a nonprofit corporation chartered by the State of Texas to protect and advance the professional interests of persons licensed to practice law in the Dallas area, to improve the relations between the Bench, the Bar, and the Public, and to advance cordial communication among lawyers.
What it reported doing in 2025
Addressing Services - The Association sells a list of names and addresses of its members only to persons or groups who are (1)running for a political office for which membership in the legal profession is a prerequisite or (2)law firms (comprised of lawyers who are members of the Association) that wish to make professional announcements, provided the content of the announcement is approved by the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors of the Association.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 40
- Transparency & Controls: 77
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 41.9%; rating input score 42
- Program expense ratio: 50.1%; rating input score 50
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 3.9%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.71; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 19%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 41.9% of revenue deployed · 50.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 28 of 28 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $298K · 34 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.