Lakewood Early Childhood PTA (LECPTA)

Legal name: Pta Texas Congress

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
756062028
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dallas, TX, US
Phone
2816272367
Rating
52
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$833,463
Expenses
$785,332
Assets
$415,343
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JESSICA EDWARDS (PRESIDENT)
  • LAUREN MELDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MELINDA BRETT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHELBY DOLSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CARRIE WALKER (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JESSICA EDWARDS (PRESIDENT)
  • LAUREN MELDER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MELINDA BRETT (VICE PRESIDENT)

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

Our mission is to strengthen the Lakewood community by fostering connection among families and investing in the success of local public schools.

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization provides funds and materials to support and enhance the education of approximately 950 elementary school students attending lakewood elementary school in dallas Texas. Support is also provided to the pta for jl long middle school,

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Affiliate network. The nonprofit sent 96% of its reported program spending through affiliated organizations.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 29
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.7%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 58.5%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.77 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 40.3%; rating input score 40; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.8%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.53; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 55.7% of revenue deployed · 58.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 141 of 350 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $460K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 18 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 40/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule G fundraiser detail did not reconcile in the filed values.