Day Resource Center for Homeless

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752747809
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
8178109797
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,715,247
Expenses
$2,696,738
Assets
$571,524
Liabilities
$252,337

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • BRUCE FRANKEL-THRU 125 (Executive Dir.): $159,254 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

DRC Solutions' (formerly known as the Day Resource Center for the Homeless) mission is to provide respectful, responsible, and effective community-based solutions to help individuals and families emerge from homelessness as productive, healthy people.

What it reported doing in 2024

Housing Case Management- The DRC provides Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) Case Management services to individuals and families who have experienced chronic homelessness. To qualify for PSH assistance, an individual or household must have experienced 12 consecutive months of homelessness or four episodes of homelessness in the past three years and have an accompanying disabling condition as verified by a medical professional. DRC PSH Case Management gives these households access to a case manager who can assist them with lifes challenges. Whether its navigating the relationship with their landlord, locating special services such as mental or physical healthcare, attaining social security benefits, finding needed household items and furniture, or simply serving as an advocate for the household, PSH participants have a trained professional to rely on as support. DRC PSH Case Managers meet regularly with program participants to help them adjust to housing, work with participants towards their personal goals, make referrals as necessary to help the participant reach these goals, and often serves as these households primary support, and advocate as they reintegrate into housing and the broader community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 74% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for grants.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.5%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 87.1%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 48; 48th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.5% of revenue deployed · 87.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.