National Legal Aid and Defender Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362337880
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2024520620
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Public Interest Law

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,098,007
Expenses
$8,386,936
Assets
$3,633,766
Liabilities
$1,966,305

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • APRIL CAMARA FRAZIER (PRESIDENT AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JO-ANN WALLACE (DIRECTOR): $390,797 total reported compensation
  • APRIL CAMARA FRAZIER (PRESIDENT AND CEO): $281,436 total reported compensation
  • ALISON BLOOMQUIST (VP, DLS): $209,819 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The national legal aid & defender association (nlada) works to promote and develop high quality, effective civil legal aid and public defense services. Nlada accomplishes this by supporting the existing network of civil and defender services throughout the country and by encouraging the formation of new legal aid and defender organizations throughout the country whose purpose it is to provide free legal assistance to low income individuals.

What it reported doing in 2024

Special projects - restricted grants received by nlada to carry out specific projects on behalf of civil legal aid and public defense. Nlada's civil and defender divisions both received funding to support and promote the delivery of high quality legal services in the field. The civil division received funding to support work to enhance outreach, education and training to civil legal aid programs during the nationwide pandemic and lock down. The defender division has received funding to carry out various initiatives on behalf of an improved public defense system.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 96
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 69.4%; rating input score 69
  • Program expense ratio: 66.9%; rating input score 67
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; 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: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.6%; rating input score 96; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: -3.6%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.43; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.54; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 23.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 69.4% of revenue deployed · 66.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 18 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $5.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $391K · 31 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $314K reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 39 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 29 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.