National Center for Justice and Liberty

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920245439
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123075051
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Liberties

Reported finances

Revenue
$466,432
Expenses
$518,117
Assets
$43,748
Liabilities
$11,026

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DANIEL SUHR (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATRICK HUGHES (CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD): $155,581 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL SUHR (PRESIDENT): $118,059 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 advance social and economic liberties and a free enterprise society through litigation, training, communication, activism and research.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research and litigation - national horsemen's benevolent and protective association v. Black car represents thoroughbred horse owners and trainers in challenging the constitutionality of the horseracing integrity and safety act (hisa), arguing that it violates the nondelegation doctrine. This advances the public interest by preserving the integrity of democratic institutions and ensuring that government power remains accountable to the people.eidson v. South Carolina department of education - car represents the state department of education & state superintendent of education ellen weaver in defense of a new state law providing educational scholarships to children from low-income families. This advances the public interest by assuming some costs from taxpayers of South Carolina onto the firm. It also advances the public interest in education reform and government support for low-income children.media accountability and transparency - filed formal complaints before the federal communications commission and federal election commission regarding unlawful coordination and improper use of broadcast media in electioneering communications. These matters advance the public interest by ensuring compliance with federal campaign and communications law, promoting fair elections, and protecting voters from undisclosed political influence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 48
  • Sustainability: 14
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 82.8%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 74.6%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -11.1%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 52.8%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 105.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 51.1% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 82.8% of revenue deployed · 74.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $386K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $156K · 6 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.