University of Texas at Arlington Alumni Association Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 751234898
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Arlington, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8173668721
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alumni Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $42,527
- Expenses
- $22,833
- Assets
- $308,411
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- E DALE MARTIN (PRESIDENT)
- JENNIFER CATHCART (V-PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- E DALE MARTIN (PRESIDENT)
- MARY ANN VAN SICLEN (SECRETARY)
- GORDON FITZGERALD (TREASURER)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of this organization shall be the support of benevolent, charitable, and educational undertakings by extending aid to students of the university of Texas at arlington, by encouraging sentiments generally favorable to education, by perpetuating and strengthening ties of affection and esteem formed in college days, and by promoting the interest and welfare of the university of Texas at arlington and its alumni.
What it reported doing in 2024
Awards to the university of Texas at arlington to further university programs
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 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 76
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.1%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 91.2%; rating input score 91
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 46.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 13.51; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -28.6% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -22.2% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -15.3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.1% of revenue deployed · 91.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $21K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.