Dallas Eviction Advocacy Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 861742216
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
- Phone
- 2149649414
- Rating
- 88
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing, Shelter N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,304,276
- Expenses
- $1,808,682
- Assets
- $1,105,951
- Liabilities
- $2,507
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- WILLIAM HOLSTON (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- STUART CAMPBELL (CHIEF LEGAL OFFICER): $127,537 total reported compensation
- WILLIAM HOLSTON (CEO): $126,174 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The dallas eviction advocacy center's mission is to promote housing justice and stability by ensuring the protection of tenant's rights through the provision of passionate and committed lawyers at no cost to the tenant.(continued on schedule o)deac has changed drastically since its grassroots inception in march 2020. Historically, in the united states, tenants who attend their eviction hearings without an attorney have a 3% chance of winning their case, regardless of the information they present. By providing pro bono legal defense for tenants facing eviction, we have been able to assist our local neighbors in remaining housed, with a success rate of 67.8%. That means our most vulnerable neighbors in our local community are allowed to remain in their homes, tax our local infrastructure and financial systems less, and get back on their feet faster to continue to maintain self-sufficiency on their own and for generations to come.
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, 5,175 individual clients were directly served through deac's full representation endeavors. When measuring for household members, that is 12,638 people that remained housed. Additionally, deac offers advice only cases and referrals to 3,708 individuals, impacting another 4,976 when including household members. This is a grand total of 17,614 people in 2024 alone.
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 95% 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 95
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 22
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 91.6%; rating input score 92
- Fundraising efficiency: $65.29 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 82; 82nd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- 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: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -38.7%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 33.9% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -18.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $128K · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.