North Central Texas Trauma Regional Advisory Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 752534492
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Arlington, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8176077019
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $12,963,967
- Expenses
- $12,833,013
- Assets
- $6,514,089
- Liabilities
- $1,605,455
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
32 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- HENDRIK J ANTONISSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (UNTIL JULY 2025))
- JIMMY D DICKERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- HENDRIK J ANTONISSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (UNTIL JULY 2025)): $220,687 total reported compensation
- DAVID POYNOR (IT MANAGER): $171,390 total reported compensation
- JIMMY D DICKERSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $161,610 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To facilitate the development, implementation, and operation of a comprehensive trauma care system based on accepted standards of care to decrease morbidity and mortality.
What it reported doing in 2024
Expenses were incurred in developing and implementing a regional trauma system plan, with over 100 hospitals, ambulance services, and fire departments. The organization participated in the work and continued to develop protocols and information systems (including databases and websites), as well as disaster preparedness activities engaged to provide regional preparedness for natural disasters, infectious disease outbreaks, terrorism events, and other health emergencies.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 95% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 68% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 80
- Transparency & Controls: 67
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 89.9%; rating input score 90
- Program expense ratio: 90.8%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 24th 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 1%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 89.9% of revenue deployed · 90.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $11.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $221K · 32 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 68 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 60 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.