Tread Together

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
393752463
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Dallas, TX, USA
Phone
2143109000
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$400,000
Expenses
$50,978
Assets
$349,022
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Joel T Williams III (President)

People named in this filing

  • Joel T Williams III (President)
  • Linda Perryman Evans (Director)
  • Andy Keller (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

Tread Together aims to provide sustained and transformative financial support to organizations with proven solutions for advancing mental health treatments, expanding access and resources, and addressing the root causes of mental illness, while advocating for greater awareness of the youth mental health crisis and reduced stigma for seeking help.

What it reported doing in 2025

Tread Together is a community-driven fundraising initiative committed to transformative change in youth mental health services in Texas. We bring people together to raise awareness, funds and momentum for the organizations leading the charge those delivering direct care, shaping policy and building systems of support that last.Tread Together is not a direct provider of mental health services and resources. Rather, it funds organizations with established leadership in youth mental health issues so they may bring their critical expertise to more Texas young people, more effectively.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 23
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 88
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 7.3%; rating input score 7
  • Program expense ratio: 57.1%; rating input score 57
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 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: 87.3%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.85; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 7.3% of revenue deployed · 57.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $29K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Mission deployment rate scored 7/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 57/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.