American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina Legal Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561019644
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Raleigh, NC, USA
Phone
9198343466
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,586,931
Expenses
$3,120,507
Assets
$8,595,905
Liabilities
$536,060

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JENNA BECKHAM (PRESIDENT)
  • CLARISSA GOODLETT (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHANTAL STEVENS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHANTAL STEVENS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $193,025 total reported compensation
  • NASSIM MOSHIREE (CHIEF PROGRAM OFFICER): $178,827 total reported compensation
  • KRISTI GRAUNKE (LEGAL DIRECTOR): $161,557 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 aclu of North Carolina dares to create a more perfect union - beyond one person, party, or side. Our mission is to realize this promise of the united states and North Carolina constitutions for all and expand the reach of their guarantees.

What it reported doing in 2024

Public education program produces high quality, informative educational materials and provide knowledgeable and engaging speakers for various events around the state showing a commitment to providing accurate and non-partisan information to all north carolinians. The foundation also strives to educate minority groups and individuals about fundamental constitutional rights and issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 91% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work 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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd 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: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 32%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.75; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.8% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.4% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $193K · 19 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.