Appellate Project Inc

What it reported doing in 2025

Too often, appellate courts make high-stakes decisions with little connection to the communities most affected. Were changing that. By fostering emerging appellate leaders, were ensuring our courts better reflect the people, values, and realities of our time. In 2025, The Appellate Project equipped emerging leaders with the skills, networks, and community they need to thrive. TAP strengthened partnerships with law firms, bar associations, and judicial institutions. Key collaborations to help advance future leaders included conversations with judges and clerks in the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, the U.S. Supreme Court for the Seventh Circuit, and the U.S. Supreme Court. TAP also fostered community and mobilized collective power through alumni gatherings and networking events, and partnered with organizations including the Asian American Bar Association and Black Women in Law. We completed our first formal strategic planning process, engaging hundreds of community members. As recommended by that process, we laid the groundwork for future initiatives by strengthening TAPs governance infrastructure, growing the Board of Directors, hiring a COO and refreshing our brand and redesigning our website to better reflect our programs and impact to better communicate how we contribute to our vision of an appellate system where the advocates, judges, and rulings from our highest courts reflect the communities they most impact. When appellate courts reflect the perspectives and lived experiences of the full public, the outcomes will be more just, the reasoning more rigorous, and the legal system more credible.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
• Program expense ratio: 72%; rating input score 72
• Fundraising efficiency: $3.42 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
  • 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: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: -53.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.91; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 29%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 34.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 12.5% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 16.9% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings