Law Society of British Columbia

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
981548924
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Vancouver, British Columbia, CA
Phone
6046692533
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$52,592,349
Expenses
$58,747,291
Assets
$239,523,515
Liabilities
$98,438,850

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

Leadership & pay

45 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Don Avison KC (CEO, Executive Director)
  • Adam Whitcombe KC (Deputy Executive Director, Deputy CEO)
  • Jeevyn Dhaliwal (President)
  • Brook Greenberg (First Vice-President)
  • Lindsay R LeBlanc (Second Vice-President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Don Avison KC (CEO, Executive Director): $479,115 total reported compensation
  • Adam Whitcombe KC (Deputy Executive Director, Deputy CEO): $291,692 total reported compensation
  • Su Forbes KC (Chief Operating Officer, LIF): $265,680 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 protect the public interest in the administration of justice by setting and enforcing standards of professional conduct for lawyers and notaries public in British Columbia.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education & Practice program services include support to lawyers for all inquiries and activities relating to fee billings, status changes, unclaimed trust funds and the administration for the reporting of continuing professional development. It also includes ensuring new and transferring lawyers are properly qualified to practice law, administrating the professional legal training course to prospective lawyers, and providing lawyers with remedial programs to those identified through practice reviews.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 77% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

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: 63
  • Accountability: 83
  • Sustainability: 34
  • 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; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 87.1%; rating input score 87; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.7%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.08; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 27 of 31 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $479K · 45 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.1M reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.