Alameda County Bar Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941256277
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5103022200
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $8,860,973
- Expenses
- $9,193,086
- Assets
- $3,359,791
- Liabilities
- $3,004,668
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Hadassah Hayashi (CEO)
- Megan Burns (President/ Sec.)
- Jo-Anna Nieves (President-Elect)
- Janice Cho (Vice-President)
Highest reported compensation
- Andrea Zambrana (CAAP Director): $184,731 total reported compensation
- Hadassah Hayashi (CEO): $165,952 total reported compensation
- Zachary Lazarus (Man. Social Worker): $120,551 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote excellence in the legal profession and to facilitate equal access to justice.
What it reported doing in 2024
Court Appointed Attorney Program (CAAP): We provided criminal defense representation to Alameda County defendants with whom the Public Defender had a conflict. In 2024 we placed about 2,500 new cases with about 50 attorneys on our panel, who together put in roughly tens of thousands of hours defending the indigent. Our social worker program for juvenile defendants also continues to flourish. Three years ago, we launched a social worker program to help connect attorneys representing adults with social workers and that program is thriving. We are connecting the adults our attorneys represent with more social workers than ever before.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 77% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 91
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 96.6%; rating input score 97
- Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: $19.83 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -3.7%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.37; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.89; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 96.6% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $185K · 16 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.3M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 8/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.