National Bar Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
480793589
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2027582017
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,930,025
Expenses
$4,989,386
Assets
$3,260,004
Liabilities
$274,503

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

Leadership & pay

63 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Wiley S Adams (President)
  • Ashley L Upkins (President-Elect)
  • Dominique Calhoun (Past President)
  • Lonita K Baker (Past President)
  • Hon Carlos Moore (Past President)
  • Tricia 'CK' Hoffler (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lakeila R Stemmons (Exec Director): $150,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nba was formed to advance the science of jurisprudence, uphold the honor of the legal profession, and promote interaction among the members of the bar.

What it reported doing in 2024

The nba seeks to advance diversity within the legal profession by providing career information and professional networking opportunities to members and pipeline programs for aspiring youth. The nba has several pipeline programs chief among them are the crump law camp and the mlk advocacy program. The corporate law section also provides scholarships to undergraduates to help them prepare for the lsat and to law students to help them prepare for bar admission.

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 96% 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 most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 43
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Program expense ratio: 80.1%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -1.2%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.7% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 81% of revenue deployed · 80.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 64 of 64 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 63 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.