Cuban American Bar Association Pro Bono Project Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 260221044
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Miami, FL, USA
- Phone
- 3056460046
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Legal Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,896,013
- Expenses
- $1,882,852
- Assets
- $3,194,124
- Liabilities
- $224,511
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jordi Martinez-Cid (President)
- Karen Cespedes (Vice-President)
- Lesley S Mendoza (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Lesley S Mendoza (Executive Director): $160,725 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
CABA Pro Bono's mission is to assist the poor and indigent community in Miami-Dade County Florida by connecting them with attorney volunteers regardless of race, creed, color, gender, sexual orientation or national origin. CABA Pro Bono further strives to support its volunteer attorneys with access to training, CLE education and mentoring.
What it reported doing in 2024
CABA members accept pro bono cases that are generally in the area of family law and immigration. Additionally, cases are accepted in the following areas: adoption, bankruptcy, consumer issues, disability, foreclosure, probate and guardianship, insurance, landlord/tenant, and other civil matters. The success of CABA's pro bono project is reflected in the strength our referral attorneys, members, friends, law firms, institutions and organizations who have demonstrated their time, efforts and monetary donations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% 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.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 57
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 69
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 45.9%; rating input score 46
- Program expense ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $29.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 35%; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.7; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.5%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.4% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 45.9% of revenue deployed · 69.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $161K · 14 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.