Frank H Hiscock Legal Aid Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 150527253
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Syracuse, NY, USA
- Phone
- 3154228191
- Rating
- 82
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Legal Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,406,620
- Expenses
- $11,171,653
- Assets
- $5,769,590
- Liabilities
- $2,967,949
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DEWAN GREGORY W (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PRESID)
- TALEV NICOLE (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- DEWAN GREGORY W (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PRESID): $188,750 total reported compensation
- TALEV NICOLE (DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $133,731 total reported compensation
- RACCIATTI JENNIFER (CONTROLLER): $128,331 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote the fundamental right of every person to equal justice under the law by providing high quality legal assistance to individuals and families in need in onondaga county and the surrounding regions.
What it reported doing in 2024
The organization provided legal representation to low-income persons who could not afford to hire private attorneys in 5,932 cases in 2024 including: 3,255 civil cases; 2,205 family court cases; 126 appeals; 292 parole and 54 extradition.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 93% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 92
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 92.9%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Pass
- 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: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.1%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.52; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.2%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 12.8% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 91% of revenue deployed · 92.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $10.4M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 28 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.