American Judicature Society to Promote the Effective Administration of Justice

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362283985
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Nashville, TN, USA
Phone
5152712281
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$529,797
Expenses
$781,977
Assets
$724,761
Liabilities
$89,707

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARTHA HILL JAMISON (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • THOMAS C LEIGHTON (PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA LEE WIGGS (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • RICHARD H LEVENSTEIN (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DENNIS COURTLAND HAYES (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DELISSA A RIDGWAY (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • RUSSELL CARPARELLI (EXECUTIVE DIR.): $126,000 total reported compensation
  • CYNTHIA GRAY (DIR CTR JUD ETHICS): $111,832 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the american judicature society is to secure and promote an independent and qualified judiciary and fair system of justice.

What it reported doing in 2014

Center for judicial ethics - the center for judicial ethics of the american judicature society acts as a clearinghouse for information about judicial ethics and discipline. The center collects information about and provides research support for the organizations that investigate complaints of judicial misconduct. The center also gathers opinions issued by judicial ethics advisory committees and each year responds to hundreds of requests for information from reporters, judges, courts, legislators, lawyers, and professors. The center publishes resources on judicial ethics, including the judicial conduct reporter, a quarterly report on developments in judicial conduct. The center presents a national conference every two years, and the center staff makes presentations at judicial education meetings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.5%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 59.1%; rating input score 59
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -47.6%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 30.4%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -30.3% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.5% of revenue deployed · 59.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $462K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $126K · 25 people listed
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2013 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 15/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.