DuPage County Chapter Justinian Society Of Lawyers
Legal name: Dupage Chapter of the Justinian Society of Lawyers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 611452303
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2015
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2015
- Location
- Elmhurst, Illinois, US
- Phone
- 630-279-6800
- Rating
- 37
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $13,430
- Expenses
- $12,029
- Assets
- $2,274
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Elizabeth A Pope (President)
- Angela M Aliota (First Vice President)
- Nicholas R Galasso (Second Vice President)
- Joseph P Glimco III (Past President)
People named in this filing
- Elizabeth A Pope (President)
- Angela M Aliota (First Vice President)
- Nicholas R Galasso (Second Vice President)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose and objectives of this Society of Italian American lawyers are to foster a spirit of friendship through social and professional interactions; to continue to improve the legal education of our members; to render mutual aid and assistance to our members; to promote the general welfare of our members by improvement of the practice of the law; and to participate in civic and community affairs so as to insure the proper administration of justice.
What it reported doing in 2015
The organization improved legal education by providing grants of 10,000.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 66% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 4
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 0
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 3.9%; rating input score 4
- Program expense ratio: 4.4%; rating input score 4
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -12% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -13.7% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 3.9% of revenue deployed · 4.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $529 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2015
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 4/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 4/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.