Centro Legal De La Raza

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237181456
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oakland, CA, USA
Phone
5104371554
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,901,160
Expenses
$12,114,634
Assets
$6,950,098
Liabilities
$4,017,696

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • MONIQUE J BERLANGA (Executive Dir.): $197,126 total reported compensation
  • MACIEL JACQUES (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $150,687 total reported compensation
  • LOURDES GUADALUPE MARTINEZ (CO-DIR ATTORNEY): $135,233 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Centro Legal De La Raza is a comprehensive legal services agency protecting and advancing the rights of low-income immigrant communities throguh culturally competent bilingual legal representation, education, and advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2024

Centro Legal De La Raza's core legal services include full scope representation referrals, and counsel and advice to more than 10,000 individuals each year. Key programs include the tenants' rights program, which promotes safe, stable, and healthy housing by helping fight unlawful evictions, rent increases, and bad conditions; the workers' rights program which promotes lawful, fair, and safe working conditions and employment practices by helping low-wage workers defend against wage theft, discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination, and the immigration program which promotes family stability and economic security by representing our most vulnerable community members, including families living in poverty, long residing undocumented immigrants and families, youth victims of violent crimes, asylum seekers, dreamers, those facing deportation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 74% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 72% for direct work, and 28% for 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: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.5%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $49.59 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • 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; 66th 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: -1.8%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.58; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.5% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $10.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $197K · 18 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $374K reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.