Muslim Legal Fund of America

Overview

Mission

MLFA is the only Muslim organization protecting civil liberties through national security expertise in federal criminal defense, immigration and habeas litigation, constitutional civil actions, and principled nonprofit governance. Support 02 SALAH SARSOUR RELEASED Next: NSCDC National Security Criminal Defense Center. Islam in Prisons Islam is significantly represented in prisons nationwide, in part due to conversion in prisons and because of disproportionate policing rates of Black and brown communities. Despite a large portion of Muslim inmates, they must fight tooth and nail to practice basic tenets of their faith. We anticipate that the Organization, IFANCA, and any other partners will be successful in (1) creating broader awareness and buy-in of the problem, and (2) establishing positive legal precedent. The Muslim Legal Fund of America (MLFA) is one of the few organizations...

What it reported doing in 2024

Took in 620 targeted federal & civil criminal defense cases and represented clients in a total of 183 active cases. Took in 160 immigration defense cases and represented clients in a total of 53 active cases. Made legal education available in partnership with like minded community organizations.

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.

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
010548371
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Headquarters
Richardson, TX, USA
Phone
(972) 331-9021
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights
Affiliation
Islam

Official website

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 59
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.7%; rating input score 60
  • Program expense ratio: 69.7%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.64 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.3%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 59.7% of revenue deployed · 69.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported · 1 of 6 affiliation controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $199K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 annual filings from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES SWIFT (ATTORNEY): $199,489 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINA A JUMP (ATTORNEY): $167,828 total reported compensation
  • ARSHIA ALI KHAN (CEO): $146,117 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: FY2024.