Dallas Center for Photography

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
830954032
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2023
Forms available
Form 990 2023
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2149193555
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Film, Video

Reported finances

Revenue
$254,197
Expenses
$290,288
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Peter Poulides (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Peter Poulides (Executive Director): $45,000 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Dallas Center for Photography's mission is to serve as a focal point for creators and appreciators of all forms of photography through education, mentorship, exhibitions, and community outreach.

What it reported doing in 2023

DCP launched its "Roots of Photography:" outreach program in 2022. These field trips to DCP helped North Texas' under-resourced middle and high school youth to better understand and critically analyze photography and its history, while experiencing a walk-in camera obscura, darkroom demos, and a guided tour of the current exhibition in DCP's Community Gallery. In the 2022-2023 school year, we served 199 students with this program in 8 field trips. Our 2000 square foot DCP gallery was the only nonprofit exhibition space dedicated to showcasing photography in the region. The gallery was free and open to the public. Exhibitions highlighted the work of our various community partners and groups, along with single-artist shows and juried competitions that displayed the diversity of talent in our region. DCP exhibited 4 gallery shows in 2023 with an opening reception for each show. Over 677 visitors came to the gallery in 2023. DCP also hosted 2 panel discussions by local and national photographers attended by a total of 69 people. In 2023, DCP offered photography workshops and activities free of charge to our community partners, like Klyde Warren Park and Booker T. Washington High School. Approximately 99 attendees participated in these community programs.

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 99% 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: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 13
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.5%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $219K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $45K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2023
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.