Dallas Innovation Alliance

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
815161144
IRS 990 coverage
2021–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2149090400
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Coalitions

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,658,829
Expenses
$1,792,743
Assets
$844,003
Liabilities
$125,819

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JENNIFER SANDERS (Exec Dir/sec): $159,882 total reported compensation
  • LLOYD SHELTON BOWLES (Chairman): $16,500 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 Innovation Alliance (DIA) is a 501(c)(3) public-private consortium of public, private, civic and academia to support smart city initiatives in Dallas. Our definition of a Smart City is one at the intersection of community, data and technology to improve quality of life, facilitate inclusive economic growth and access to opportunity, and increase resource efficiencies. Namely, how do we come together to find new ways to solve pressing challenges? Our most significant activities are focused on closing the digital divide through a number of programs to fill the homework gap, STEM programming, support residents applying for the Affordable Connectivity Program, access devices, providing 1:1 resident support for digital navigation, and learning digital skills.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, our Connected Dallas Digital Ambassadors program served over 8000 households of which 91 percent represented BIPOC populations and 74 percent live at 65% or less of the Average Median Income [identified as very low income by ARPA]. We supported residents through a number of programs to, support residents applying for Lifeline and Texas Benefits, access to computers for both onsite use, and through periodic distributions, provide one on one support for navigation of digital services, assisting in Texas Benefits Enrollment as a certified CPP navigator, and learning digital skills.

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 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.1%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 85.2%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $73.72 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

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: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -8.1%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.47; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.8%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 42.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.8% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.1% of revenue deployed · 85.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.