Justice in Action
Legal name: Lancaster County Interfaith Justice Organization
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 882109882
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Lincoln, NE, United States
- Phone
- (402) 937-1974
- Rating
- 45
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Interfaith Coalitions
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $234,408
- Expenses
- $240,494
- Assets
- $44,567
- Liabilities
- $2,552
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Pastor Tobi White (Co-President)
- Rev Kirstie Engel (Co-President)
Highest reported compensation
- Elizabeth Graverholt (Lead Organizer): $81,795 total reported compensation
- Olivia Butts (Organizer): $78,550 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Justice in Action is an interfaith, grassroots coalition of faith communities in Lancaster County, Nebraska. We harness the power of organized people to address big community problems. Kathy Haake** is a member of First Mennonite Church. Originally from Beatrice, she earned a degree in English from the University of Nebraska–Lincoln and a book publishing certificate from New York University. Kathy worked as a book editor for over twenty years. She was also the associate director of a nonprofit organization, where for over a decade she partnered with faith communities to help keep children safe. She now works as the executive assistant for a philanthropic foundation. Kathy and her husband, Kevin, raised their three children—Kaspar, Kadin, and El—in Lincoln, a city they are happy to call home. She is grateful for the opportunity to serve with Justice in Action to help create.
What it reported doing in 2024
Proposed solutions were presented to decision makers at the Nehemiah Assembly held on May 1, 2024 and attended by over 1100 people. The mental health research team presented facts on the amount of resources available in Lancaster County, and the challenge of finding the proper person or organization to solve an individual's mental health needs. The proposal was to build a navigation system by initiating a working team to investigate how such a system would work. The pre-trial diversion team focused on reducing the County Jail population by allowing more individuals to choose pre-trial diversion, rather than staying in the Jail while awaiting trial. Unfortunately the County Attorney did not show up at the event, and thus the solutions were not accepted. The Affordable Housing research team focused on how to avoid eviction. Their recommended solution was to develop a Pre-eviction Mediation program for landlords and tenants, to take place prior to reaching the point of filing for eviction.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 69
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -2.6%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.19; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 66.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -200% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 48.5% per year; rating input score 100; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -17.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 30 of 30 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $4K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $82K · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Fund balance restriction sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.