California Changelawyers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 943104546
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2016–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4158560780
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Law, Jurisprudence
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,892,655
- Expenses
- $2,202,064
- Assets
- $4,533,884
- Liabilities
- $89,204
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- RASHA GERGES SHIELDS (PRESIDENT)
- ALEXIS AMEZCUA (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
- BENNIE J MACKEY II (CO-VICE PRESIDENT)
- CHRISTOPHER PUNONGBAYAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER PUNONGBAYAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $244,155 total reported compensation
- JASJIT SINGH DHANOA (DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMS): $144,931 total reported compensation
- STACI YOUNG (DEVELOPMENT OFFICER): $118,597 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To build a better justice system for all californians.
What it reported doing in 2024
The California immigration legal fellowship is a first of its kind program in state history which expands access to counsel in the most underserved rural regions of the state. The legal fellowship is a three-year capacity building and professional development program for recent law graduates to become deportation defense practitioners. The current cohort of seven fellows are placed across 6 host organizations, some of which have never provided deportation defense services to their communities. The program aims to increase the number of qualified immigration attorneys defending California residents against family separation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 74% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 66
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 69.6%; rating input score 70
- Program expense ratio: 66.7%; rating input score 67
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 95.7%; rating input score 96; 30th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
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: 23.9%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.06; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 28.3%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 69.6% of revenue deployed · 66.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $244K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2016 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 28 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 25 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 18/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.