Dare to Dream Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 333160541
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Trussville, AL, USA
- Phone
- 2058109221
- Rating
- 41
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $59,853
- Expenses
- $6,128
- Assets
- $53,725
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Lyndia Stinson (President)
People named in this filing
- Lyndia Stinson (President)
- Natalie Thicklen (VP)
- Veleria Stinson (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Dare to Dream empowers girls ages 5-18 to reach their fullest potential by providing mentorship, leadership development, and enriching experiences that build confidence, character, and resilience. Through education, community engagement, and opportunities to explore their dreams, we inspire young girls to believe in themselves and create a brighter future.
What it reported doing in 2025
Dare to Dream Inc has served over twenty local students, since incorporating. We have hosted financial literacy training, basic survival skills training and held fun outings and activities that encourage working in groups and problem solving. We provided the young ladies basic hygiene products and hosted meet and greet dinners.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 8
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 87
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 1.9%; rating input score 2
- Program expense ratio: 18.8%; rating input score 19
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 89.8%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.77; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 1.9% of revenue deployed · 18.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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 2/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.