Rebuilding Together Greater Dallas Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 043613194
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2009
- Location
- Plano, TX, USA
- Phone
- 9722456900
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Housing Rehabilitation
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $534,939
- Expenses
- $591,307
- Assets
- $238,867
- Liabilities
- $45,919
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
11 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SANDY SWEENEY (PRESIDENT)
- BRAD SANDERS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- TIA LAFAVOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- ELINOR OCHOA (PRESIDENT - ELECT)
Highest reported compensation
- TIA LAFAVOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $99,225 total reported compensation
- MAIJA GEORGE (DIRECTOR OF GRANTS & OUTREACH): $85,000 total reported compensation
- CHRIS BENNETT (PROGRAM MANAGER): $81,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Rtgd repairs homes, revitalizes communities, and rebuilds lives by providing critical home repairs and accessibility modifications for low-income homeowners. Through partnerships with corporations, foundations, community organizations, volunteers, and homeowners themselves, we bring together the resources needed to improve health, safety, and quality of life in the communities we serve.
What it reported doing in 2025
Rebuilding together north Texas provided critical home repairs and modifications to veterans and their families through its rebuilding for heroes program. During the tax year, rtntx completed repairs on six homes and one facility, directly impacting 506 veterans. Services included accessibility modifications, safety repairs, and essential systems improvements designed to allow veterans to remain safely in their homes. In total, the rebuilding for heroes and national rebuilding month programs combined served 25 homeowners and their families and mobilized 275 volunteers who contributed 4,070 hours of service.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 69
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 89
- Sustainability: 15
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 69.5%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
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: 90%; rating input score 90; 26th 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.5%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.4; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 44.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1.6% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 69.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $411K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $99K · 11 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.