California Access to Justice Commission
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 843344697
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2020–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Carmichael, CA, USA
- Phone
- 5106291264
- Rating
- 93
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,168,423
- Expenses
- $7,067,189
- Assets
- $6,706,161
- Liabilities
- $6,193,276
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
People named in this filing
- Catherine Blakemore (Chair)
- Judge Mark Juhas (Past Chair)
- Justice Gail Ruderman Feuer (Vice-Chair)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The California Access to Justice Commission advances access to justice for all Californians by expanding resources, removing barriers, and developing innovations so everyone can effectively and efficiently resolve their civil legal issues.
What it reported doing in 2024
- We released a report about the current challenges California litigants face because too few court reporters are employed by trial courts.(https://calatj.org/publications/a2r ) One million Superior Court hearings a year are conducted without providing an official transcript. The report described the rights and interests at stake, the harms this causes, and options for addressing it. It has been widely quoted in submissions to the ongoing writ proceeding on the issue in the California Supreme Court, FVAP v. Superior Courts, S288176, and in submissions to the Legislature regarding a bill to allow greater use of electronic recording subject to conditions. - LRS/Nonprofit Collaborations Last year, CalATJ supported the proposed amendments to Business and Professions Code Section 6155. The amendments permit nonprofits to participate in lawyer referrals, under a new exception to the prohibition against an entity that is not a Certified Lawyer Referral Service (LRS) from making referrals to specific lawyers. CalATJ has provided the State Bar with a report that provides suggested regulations, as well as suggestions, and questions for further consideration on ways for LRSs to enhance access to justice for Californians through nonprofit collaborations, and we discussed enhancements that do not depend on such collaborations.- Approximately 15 other programmatic activities plus roughly 40 committee meetings. See https://calatj.org/news/read-the-california-access-to-justice-commissions-2024-annual-report
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 91% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 97% of its reported program spending out as grants.
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 94
- Transparency & Controls: 94
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 40
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 92.6%; rating input score 93
- Program expense ratio: 93.8%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: $2,301.3 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- 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: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 1.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.92; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 41.6% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 40.7% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.8% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 92.6% of revenue deployed · 93.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 29 of 29 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $6.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 30 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $222K reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 101 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 101 filed related-organization links
- 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 7/100.