Life After Justice
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 460678444
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2019
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 0000000000
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Legal Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $113,155
- Expenses
- $997,998
- Assets
- $2,409,651
- Liabilities
- $25,473
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Joi Thomas (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- Joi Thomas (Executive Director): $77,184 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Life After Justice (LAJ) fights to free the wrongfully convicted and provides support in reclaiming their lives after justice. Created by exonerees, the majority exoneree-led Board of Directors' approach is rooted in the knowledge, expertise, and understanding from the lived experience of its leadership.
What it reported doing in 2024
Incentivized Informants Research Project -The Incentivized Informants Project is a first-of-its kind research project focused on examining the role of incentivized informants in known wrongful convictions. Incentivized witness testimony is a leading cause of wrongful convictions, contributing to more than 15% of wrongful convictions that were later overturned through DNA testing. LAJ's research involves reviewing 2,101 cases-out of the first 3,500 known exonerations in the National Registry of Exonerations-that involved false or perjured testimony, to determine which cases involved incentivized informants. LAJ has completed a preliminary review of 98% of wrongful convictions involving perjury or false accusations (2,058 out of 2,101 cases) and has identified at least 983 cases likely involving incentivized informants. LAJ is conducting research to build a database of these cases that will be used to educate and inform key stakeholders on this issue.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 67% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 28
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 49.4%; rating input score 49
- Fundraising efficiency: $0.35 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -782%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.41; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 7.7%; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 91.7% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -31.4% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 28.3% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 49.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $493K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $77K · 9 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $229K reported
- Consistency: 42 of 42 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- 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: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 45/100.