Healthy Tarrant County Collaboration

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
432087946
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Fort Worth, TX, USA
Phone
8173215300
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$954,686
Expenses
$911,198
Assets
$357,526
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • EMILY SPENCE (PRESIDENT)
  • TONYA SOSEBEE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • LINDA FULMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LINDA FULMER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $60,589 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Htcc was formed to conduct a countywide assessment in order to discover the needs of the community and then better address the health problems in a coordinated, efficient and effective way.

What it reported doing in 2024

Healthy foods access. Working with community partners to provide fresh produce in underserved communities through a combination of sales of wholesale priced bags of fresh produce and supporting the development of community-member owned urban farms.stop six community corps. Deploying trusted community members as public health messengers in neighborhoods that are historically mistrustful of traditional public health authorities.policy-systems-environmental strategies to increase citations over arrests. Testing a layered strategy to seek better utilization of cite & release ordinances in tarrant county in order to reduce arrests for offenses that are eligible for tickets.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 94% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

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

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.7%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 99.2%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 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: 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.6%; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.39; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.6%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 26.6% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.7% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.7% of revenue deployed · 99.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $904K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $61K · 17 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 49/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.