Law Firm Allianceinc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
272629137
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
6782980750
Rating
21
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$440,500
Expenses
$497,375
Assets
$773,295
Liabilities
$1,925

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • DEB CAMERON (MEMBER)
  • AIMEE DAYHOFF (SECRETARY)
  • BILL DURR (MEMBER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The members of the alliance will share information regarding (1) providing better services; (2) firm governance (including ideas on partner compensation formulas, salary ranges, associate advancement, etc.); and (3) marketing strategies.

What it reported doing in 2025

Providing member firms with competent resources for legal knowledge outside of their geographic areas of practice through 1) simple referral to another member firm, 2) informal consultation with a lawyer in another member firm, or 3) the association by the client of a member firm as supplemental or local counsel. The alliance promotes and facilitates the flow of educational information between member-firms. For example, meetings of members are governed by specific agendas that include outside speakers, interactive discussions regarding firm management and structural issues, and an alliance sponsored email/listserv that promotes ongoing dialogue between members on business conditions facing mid-size firms and methods of improving those conditions. General membership meetings occur twice each year.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

REVIEW - Revenue has grown recently. 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: 50
  • Accountability: 6
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -12.9%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.