Center for Study of Responsive Law

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
526082290
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023878030
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Consumer Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,569,301
Expenses
$1,336,417
Assets
$27,495,767
Liabilities
$3,001

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Claire Nader (Trustee)
  • Ralph Nader (Trustee)
  • Laura Milleron (Trustee)

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 Center for Study of Responsive Law (Center) supports and conducts a wide variety of research and educational projects to encourage the political, economic and social institutions of this country to be more aware of the needs of citizen-consumer.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Center for Study of Responsive Law supports and conducts a wide variety of research and educational projects to encourage the government and corporate institutions to be more aware of the needs of the citizen-consumer. The Center has published a variety of books, reports, newsletters and pamphlets on a number of public interest issues and donates many books to institutions and individuals. The Center also hosts conferences on emerging public policy matters. The Center has also served as an incubator for a variety of projects which have become independent 501(c)(3) organizations. For example, the Center has played a pivotal role in the creation of the Ocean Awareness Project, a 501(c)(3) organization, based in Washington, DC. In addition, Center staff and board members provide free strategic and policy advice to a variety of nonprofit, tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organizations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 80% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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

STRONG - 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 93
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 72.1%; rating input score 72
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 91.8%; rating input score 92; 27th 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: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 48%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.57; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 72.1% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 43 of 44 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.