Justice At Stake Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
204098898
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025889700
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$440,272
Expenses
$1,014,124
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Susan Liss (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Susan Liss (Executive Director): $121,363 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To keep our courts fair and impartial by educating the public and working for reforms to keep politics and special interests out of the courtroom and to increase diversity on the bench.

What it reported doing in 2016

Communications and Public Education. Focused national attention on the threat to our courts by releasing New Politics of Judicial Elections report 2013-2014 in collaboration with two partner groups. Launched report with National Press Club event and through press releases and interviews, and distributed it to thousands of allies and reporters. Launched a judicial outreach civic education project called Our Courts America, established a website, and worked with Honorary Chair Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on civics education panel and video. Specific accomplishments included: substantial earned national media coverage, fair courts advocates have the data and arguments they need to make the case for reforms in their states, organizational video capacity launched and in-house studio established.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% 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

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -130.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -18.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -33% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $862K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.