Texas Ethics Commission data
Release v1.4
Source snapshot September 17, 2026
Latest eligible reported transaction September 15, 2026
Canonical Vendor
Encore Printing
Resolved vendor identity assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission payee records.
Canonical vendor · Vendor ID 104678 · Resolution: Indexed Canonical Identity
Total Payments
$31,252.68
Client Filers
4
Payments
34
Activity Range
11/10/2011–11/06/2016
Largest Payment
$2,089.72
Graph: 4 connected filers · 34 payments · $31,252.68 represented
Canonical vendor assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission reported payee identities. Source records remain unchanged.
Reported Names
Payee names preserved from the reported/curated source layer and resolved to this canonical vendor.
- Encore Printing
Top Client Filers
Canonical client relationships from vendor_clients_canonical.
| # | Filer | Paid | Payments | Last Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $25,487.51 | 23 | 11/13/2012 |
| 2 | DeAyala, Emilio F | $3,197.02 | 2 | 11/10/2011 |
| 3 | McDaniel, Merry K. (Mrs.) | $2,063.05 | 8 | 11/06/2016 |
| 4 | Paxton, W. Kenneth (Mr.) | $505.10 | 1 | 12/04/2013 |
Shared Client Network
Other canonical vendors paid by the same filer clients. Ranked by shared-client count.
This is a structural overlap measure, not evidence of affiliation or coordination.
| Vendor | Shared Clients | Focal Coverage | Peer Clients | Network Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
UPS STORE
Vendor ID 339679
|
4 | 100.0% | 503 | 0.8% |
|
OFFICE MAX
Vendor ID 230798
|
4 | 100.0% | 1,327 | 0.3% |
|
OFFICE DEPOT
Vendor ID 230284
|
4 | 100.0% | 3,017 | 0.1% |
|
Barfield Photography
Vendor ID 27941
|
3 | 75.0% | 41 | 7.1% |
|
COLON & COMPANY
Vendor ID 69551
|
3 | 75.0% | 67 | 4.4% |
|
CHICK-FIL-A
Vendor ID 60264
|
3 | 75.0% | 483 | 0.6% |
|
HARLAND CLARKE
Vendor ID 139665
|
3 | 75.0% | 670 | 0.4% |
|
KROGER
Vendor ID 181532
|
3 | 75.0% | 785 | 0.4% |
|
STARBUCKS
Vendor ID 294631
|
3 | 75.0% | 690 | 0.4% |
|
FACEBOOK
Vendor ID 109240
|
3 | 75.0% | 1,638 | 0.2% |
|
HEB
Vendor ID 142370
|
3 | 75.0% | 1,480 | 0.2% |
|
SAM'S CLUB
Vendor ID 273581
|
3 | 75.0% | 1,360 | 0.2% |
Method: Focal Coverage = shared clients ÷ this vendor's client count.
Network Overlap = Jaccard similarity: shared clients ÷ union of both client sets.
Recent Reported Payments
| Date | Client Filer | Amount | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/06/2016 | McDaniel, Merry K. (Mrs.) | $453.82 | push cards |
| 11/01/2016 | McDaniel, Merry K. (Mrs.) | $269.47 | push cards for campaign |
| 10/10/2016 | McDaniel, Merry K. (Mrs.) | $269.47 | push cards for campaign |
| 08/16/2016 | McDaniel, Merry K. (Mrs.) | $130.94 | banner for campaign |
| 10/13/2015 | McDaniel, Merry K. (Mrs.) | $269.47 | campaign cards |
| 12/04/2013 | Paxton, W. Kenneth (Mr.) | $505.10 | posters, lapel stickers |
| 11/13/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $394.97 | Printing Marketing Materials |
| 11/08/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $2,089.72 | Printing of Marketing material |
| 11/08/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $1,694.75 | Printing Marketing Materials |
| 11/06/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $1,414.39 | Printed Matericals |
| 11/06/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $992.07 | Printing Marketing Material |
| 10/26/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $1,862.80 | Door Hangers |
| 10/26/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $652.57 | Push Cards |
| 10/26/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $415.95 | Push Cards |
| 10/26/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $415.95 | Push Cards |
| 10/24/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $542.87 | Push Cards |
| 10/05/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $1,553.01 | Print Campaign Materials |
| 08/10/2012 | Williams, Frances Dianne (Miss) | $1,429.41 | Printing of Campaign Material |
| 11/10/2011 | DeAyala, Emilio F | $1,598.51 | Event Printing |
Evidence basis: A canonical vendor identity was resolved using the curated vendor layer. Raw reported-payee statistics remain separate from canonical vendor statistics so the source record and analytical identity are distinguishable.