Dallas College Faculty Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
751589245
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Crandell, TX, USA
Phone
2145337347
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$75,879
Expenses
$23,871
Assets
$879,487
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jennifer Siemantel (President)
  • Denise Griffin (Vice President)
  • Tamar Slider (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Jennifer Siemantel (President)
  • Adrien Cuellar-McGuire (Treasurer)
  • Denise Griffin (Vice President)

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

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

Overview

Mission

The purposes of the DCCFA shall be to improve its members professional abilities and to secure for them better salaries and working conditions, sponsor seminars and courses for its members, participate in teacher conventions, bargain collectively and process grievances, to ensure academic freedom, and keep its members informed of its activities through regular meetings and newsletters.

What it reported doing in 2024

Faculty Legal Fund - The legal assistance fund will be used to provide legal assistance and other necessary help for DCCFA members involved in contractual and/or academic freedom disputes within the Dallas County Community College District. The Council will supervise the expenditure of these funds and the selection of an attorney. Legal assistance funds are available to: a. Faculty who have been active members of the DCCFA for two consecutive years immediately prior to the year in which they request assistance and b. Faculty who have become active members in the first year that they are eligible to become active members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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: 35
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 23.8%; rating input score 24
  • Program expense ratio: 45.5%; rating input score 46
  • Fundraising efficiency: $12.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 68.5%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 36.84; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 23.8% of revenue deployed · 45.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $11K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 46/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.