Alliance for Justice Action Campaign

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
522330508
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024647381
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights, Social Action, Advocacy N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$604,732
Expenses
$498,750
Assets
$796,413
Liabilities
$119,481

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAKIM BROOKS (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RAKIM BROOKS (PRESIDENT): $178,100 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The alliance for justice action campaign (afjac) promotes a national conversation about the importance of the courts with a goal of advancing core constitutional values, preserving human rights, securing unfettered access to the judicial system, and guaranteeing the even-handed administration of justice for all. Afjac also serves as the nation's leading resource on the legal framework for 501(c)(4) nonprofit advocacy efforts.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education: afj action campaign educates voters and the public about the importance of federal courts and state supreme courts on constitutional rights and protections. Afj action highlights corruption and conflicts of interest of multiple supreme court justices, including conducting national media campaigns and mobilizing organizational partners to highlight ethics issues at the court and call for court reforms. Afj action also releases an educational annual report on the landscape of state supreme courts elections and key developments each year. Afj action also creates new resources to help coalitionmembers with different tax statuses understand how they can work together without jeopardizing their 501(c)(3) partners. These resources were posted on afjac's website, shared with funders, and disseminated at conferences and coalition trainings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.6%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 79.6%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $36.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 19th 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: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 17.5%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.6; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: Limited

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.6% of revenue deployed · 79.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $397K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $145K reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.