Legal Services NYC

Legal name: Lsny-bronx Corporation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161759590
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
917-661-4500
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$31,276,771
Expenses
$31,352,017
Assets
$10,486,764
Liabilities
$5,990,118

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • RASMUSSEN RAUN J (EXECUTIVE DIR., LSNYC (THRU 6/28/24)): $296,014 total reported compensation
  • RICHARDSON MARIE (PROJECT DIRECTOR): $255,443 total reported compensation
  • LAMB CHRISTOPHER D (DIRECTOR, LITIGATION): $217,598 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Legal Services NYC fights poverty and seeks racial, social, and economic justice for low-income New Yorkers through the provision of high-quality civil legal services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Other - we represent people in other civil legal matters, such as consumer, immigration and employment matters. In the consumer area, we defend individuals being sued in debt collection cases and enforce people's right to fair debt collection. Our immigration practice focuses on adjustment of status, naturalization replacements. In the employment arena, we help people get wages to which they are entitled and defend people's employment rights. We also help client groups assert their rights to habitable homes, decent schools and nondiscriminatory housing.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 83% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 84%; rating input score 84
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.09 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.2%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.2%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 84% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $26.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $296K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 7 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.