Inner City Law Center
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953697572
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2138912880
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Legal Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $21,852,761
- Expenses
- $20,326,674
- Assets
- $24,904,434
- Liabilities
- $6,290,394
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
42 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Kenneth Trujillo-Jamison (President)
- Pamela S Palmer (Vice President)
- Adam Murray (Chief Executive Officer)
Highest reported compensation
- Adam Murray (Chief Executive Officer): $425,127 total reported compensation
- Roshawnda Bolton (Chief Operating Officer): $220,895 total reported compensation
- Theresa E Glenn (General Counsel): $214,344 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
In 2024, Inner City Law Center, ICLC, served over 3,400 people, helping vulnerable Angelenos to remain in their homes and recover nearly $20.5 million in financial benefits.
What it reported doing in 2024
Bringing Families Home Project (BFH): BFH helps families involved in the child welfare system overcome housing barriers so they can stay together or reunify. Through legal advocacy and financial assistance, we support stable housing as a foundation for family preservation.HIV Law Project: ICLC helps low-income people living with HIV/AIDS fight discriminatory housing practices, maintain safe and affordable housing, and access public benefits.Benefits Advocacy Project: ICLC provides training, technical assistance, and quality control to benefits specialists working to end homelessness by enrolling people who are homeless because of a severe disability in public benefits programs. ICLC also represents clients who are appealing the denial of their application for social security benefits.Policy Advocacy and Impact Litigation: ICLC advocates for public policies that provide long-term solutions to homelessness. We also use impact litigation to help change systemic practices that are harmful to low-income people living without homes or at risk of homelessness.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 79% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 84
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.5%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $40.69 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 7%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 18.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 80.5% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 34 of 34 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $17.5M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $425K · 42 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.