Lancaster Bar Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
230784543
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lancaster, PA, USA
Phone
7173930737
Rating confidence
Limited

Reported finances

Revenue
$742,849
Expenses
$685,012
Assets
$1,114,291
Liabilities
$123,069

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BERNARD ILKHANOFF ESQ (PRESIDENT)
  • JILL M LASKOWITZ ESQ (PRESIDENT ELECT)
  • LUKE T WEBER ESQ (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ROBERT S CRONIN ESQ (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • LISA M DRIENDL-MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA M DRIENDL-MILLER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $154,545 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 competence, ethics, and collegiality of the legal profession; to provide service to the public; and to provide for the fair administration of justice for all in lancaster county.

What it reported doing in 2024

The safe driving academy program was formed to provide two courses, defensive driving and alive at 25, to the general public through in-person classroom sessions that focus on reducing traffic violations, preventing motor vehicle incidents, saving lives, and creating safer roads for everyone. The defensive driving course equips drivers with the skills to recognize and respond to hazardous driving situations by promoting positive changes in driving attitudes and behaviors, encouraging respectful, lawful, and safety-conscious decisions. The alive at 25 course empowers young drivers, ages 16 to 24, to make safe, respectful, and legal driving decisions by increasing awareness of roadway risks, understanding factors inside and outside a driver's control, and making choices that lead to safer outcomes. Both courses are offered over a four week period during the summer months.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program 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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 3rd 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: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 37th 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.8%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.63; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22.6%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -2.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 15 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 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: 2 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 58/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.