National Health Law Program Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 953080947
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3102046010
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $12,643,871
- Expenses
- $11,205,518
- Assets
- $27,881,784
- Liabilities
- $1,598,591
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ELIZABETH TAYLOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ELIZABETH TAYLOR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $335,619 total reported compensation
- JANE PERKINS (LEGAL DIRECTOR): $309,168 total reported compensation
- JORGE ADRIAN NARANJO (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $303,828 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule o.the national health law program protects and advances the health care rights and related civil rights of low-income individuals, families, and underserved communities. Our advocacy strives to give voice to low-income people and families in federal and state policy making. The national health law program litigates to ensure that low-income people and underserved communities can obtain quality health care to which they are entitled because of various federal and state laws, such as medicaid, the affordable care act, americans with disabilities act, the children's health insurance program, the civil rights act of 1964 and many other laws and policies.
What it reported doing in 2024
See schedule o.national policy: the national health law program's health policy work advocates for protection and expansion of health and civil rights of low-income individuals and families and underserved communities. The national health law program's health policy efforts in 2024 included but were not limited to the following: (1) advocating to protect the medicaid program from anticipated efforts to cut funding and impose barriers to enrollment and access to services; (2) working to prevent damage caused by the end of the public health emergency, through advocacy at the federal level and support to advocates at the state level; (3) providing legal and policy support to national and state based coalitions working to protect, and where possible, expand access to health care for low-income individuals, families and underserved communities; (4) providing legal support and problem-solving expertise to policymakers, advocates, and providers as legal issues arise at the administrative (regulatory) and state implementation levels; (5) providing legal support to policymakers to consider new models for providing health care to all.during 2024 the national health law program again increased itssubstantial efforts to counter health care disparities and defend civil rights laws, including by advocating for strong regulations to enforce section 1557, the anti-discrimination provision of the affordable care act.in 2024, national health law program staff provided state and federal health care advocates legal assistance for myriad policy and legal concerns of low-income individuals and families. Staff members were also involved in and/or featured in scores of conferences and training events. Staff also produced numerous fact sheets, issue briefs, q&a's, and additional resources that were shared via listservs, email, social media platforms, press outreach, and other means. Much of this work product was also posted on the organization's website.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 71.7%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 78.2%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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: 11.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.49; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 14.8%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 71.7% of revenue deployed · 78.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $8.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $336K · 22 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $289K reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 34 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 28 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.