Transition Resource Action Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 921587776
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
- Location
- Dallas, TX, USA
- Phone
- 4696874747
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $6,830,794
- Expenses
- $4,436,299
- Assets
- $5,121,020
- Liabilities
- $156,160
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- NICOLE BINKLEY-from 125 (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- NICOLE BINKLEY-from 125 (CEO): $174,407 total reported compensation
- JOSH RUNNELS (CFO): $118,475 total reported compensation
- Chris Packard (INT. EXEC. DIR.): $2,273 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Transition Resource Action Center (TRAC) is a nonprofit organization dedicated to providing individualized pathways to stable housing, independence, and well-being to disconnected youth. The organizations vision is that TRAC youth are equipped with the stability, skills, and confidence to pursue their life goals.The organization is primarily supported through grants and contributions from individuals and other organizations.
What it reported doing in 2025
TRAC provides a substantial amount of housing support when it comes to program expenses. Direct assistance to clients can include food, clothing, furniture, counseling services, IDs, etc. Program expenses include storage units, online learning tools (zoom, google classroom, etc), move in kits, conference fees (travel, registration, lodging, food) for youth to attend. Workforce preparation. Meals and snacks for the drop-in centers.Housing, Workforce and Aftercare are the three programs. We have internally re-organized to two larger departments: Housing and Child Welfare (workforce and aftercare).
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 73% for direct work, and 27% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 55%; rating input score 55
- Program expense ratio: 84.2%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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; 63rd 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: 35.1%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.15; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.7%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 65.6% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 53.5% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 54.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 55% of revenue deployed · 84.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $174K · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.