Council for Court Excellence

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521241825
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027855917
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,793,865
Expenses
$1,497,190
Assets
$1,922,217
Liabilities
$210,565

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

Leadership & pay

188 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PATRICK MCGLONE (PRESIDENT (THRU JUNE);IMM. PAST PRESIDENT)
  • PAULETTE E CHAPMAN (VP (THRU JUNE); PRESIDENT)
  • MISTY THOMAS ZALESKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MISTY THOMAS ZALESKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $153,741 total reported compensation
  • ELISA ORTIZ (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $130,115 total reported compensation
  • TRACY VELAZQUEZ (POLICY DIRECTOR): $127,931 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Council for court excellence's (cce's) mission is to bring people together to conduct research, educate, and advocate to make d.c.'s unique legal systems more just, equitable, and accountable to the community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Youth justice: the youth justice committee works to improve outcomes for youth in Washington, d.c. Involved in the juvenile justice, criminal, and child welfare systems. This committee researches and analyzes local youth justice issues, publishes reports documenting its findings, and advocates for changes to local juvenile justice laws, systems, and policies. Notable past projects included: reform of the abuse and neglect system, legal representation in family court, juvenile justice reform and school discipline, among others.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 79% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.7%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 82.9%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $16.01 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • 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: Limited
  • 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.5%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.5%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.7% of revenue deployed · 82.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 181 of 181 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $154K · 188 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $107K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.