Ms JD

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205112363
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Covina, CA, USA
Phone
6174605311
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Women's Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$939,367
Expenses
$860,808
Assets
$278,524
Liabilities
$102,339

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Francesca D Allison (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Francesca D Allison (CEO): $152,914 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ms. JD is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to the success of aspiring and early career women lawyers. Ms. JD is governed by a volunteer Board of Directors comprised of practicing attorneys and community leaders and supported by a small group of independent contractors, one part-time staff member and two full-time staff members. Founded at Stanford Law School in 2006 by a group of female law students from Boalt Hall UC Berkeley, Cornell, Georgetown, Harvard, NYU, Stanford, UCLA, UT Austin, the University of Chicago, the University of Michigan, the University of Virginia, and Yale. Serving as a unique nexus between the profession and the pipeline of diverse attorneys, Ms. JD's online community provides a forum for dialogue, professional development, and networking among women lawyers and law students. Ms. JD celebrates women's achievements, addresses remaining challenges, and facilitates continued progress by bringing legal practitioners and law students together to share

What it reported doing in 2025

Public Interest Scholarship: The Ms. JD Scholarship program provides a stipend to students as they pursue careers in public interest and civil rights law. Ms. JD aims to award scholarships to applicants who will become leaders in the public interest and civil rights community and who will follow through on a plan to pursue public interest and civil rights career paths. This commitment can be demonstrated through prior work experience (not necessarily legal in nature), engagement in public service or civil rights work during your undergraduate and legal education, and service and volunteer work. Successful applicants demonstrate an understanding of the rewards and challenges of a public interest or civil rights legal career.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 72.4%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $7.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.4%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.32; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.37; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17.8%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.5% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 72.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $623K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 21 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.