Illinois Bar Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
370810222
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Springfield, IL, USA
Phone
2175251760
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,414,826
Expenses
$2,390,601
Assets
$8,885,015
Liabilities
$1,358,077

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

Leadership & pay

32 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ryan Theriault (Immediate Past President)
  • John Nisivaco (President)
  • Lauren Tuckey (1st Vice-President)
  • Juan Thomas (2nd Vice President)
  • Jo Anna Pollock (3rd Vice President)
  • Stacey Hacker Meehan (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Dennis J Archer (Asst Treasurer): $221,565 total reported compensation
  • Stacey Hacker Meehan (Executive Director): $169,977 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Illinois Bar Foundation is to ensure meaningful access to the justice system, especially for those with limited means, and to assist lawyers who can no longer support themselves due to incapacity.

What it reported doing in 2024

Illinois JusticeCorps Program - Illinois JusticeCorps places college students, recent graduates and other volunteers in select courthouses throughout Illinois to help the increasing number of litigants appearing in court without lawyers. Volunteers are trained to provide court patrons with legal information and direct them to available resources available in the court and elsewhere.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 64% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 67% for direct work, and 33% for grants.

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: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.8%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 75.2%; rating input score 75; 20th 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; 63rd 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: Fail
    • 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: 30%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.72; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.8% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $222K · 32 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 33 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 34 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.