Project Access Collin County Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
451072695
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Frisco, TX, USA
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$639,203
Expenses
$627,412
Assets
$318,923
Liabilities
$18,564

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DJ VERRET (PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • NEHA DHUDSHIA (PRESIDENT)
  • MANVINDER KAINT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • AIMEE GARZA (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • JENNIFER BOLTON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • DJ VERRET (PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • DEEPAK PAHUJA (DIRECTOR)
  • LATA SHRIDHARAN (DIRECTOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of project access collin county is to improve the health of our community by creating access to health care and coordinating necessary resource referrals and other basic services for those most in need through education and empowerment.

What it reported doing in 2025

Project access-collin county is a collaborative initiative that organizes donated specialty and primary care services to uninsured low income collin county residents. Through an integrated network that includes all segments of the health care delivery system, pacc acknowledges, quantifies and coordinates physician charity care and spreads that care more equitably amongst physicians. Pacc makes it easier for physicians who are already caring for the uninsured to better manage and coordinate care. Pacc clients who are at or below 200% of the poverty level and who are unable to obtain health insurance may qualify for the program and are referred by the county, participating hospitals, and volunteer physicians to participate in the program. Since inception in 2011, pacc has coordinated care for over 1,590 patients with 140 active patients as of december 31, 2025. In 2025, the pacc provided $305,549 in medical care and services, which includes an estimated 20% of claims.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 76% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 45% for direct work, and 55% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.7%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $132.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 15th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.8%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.51; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -8.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.7% of revenue deployed · 84.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $528K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule M noncash within contributions did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.