Pro Bono Partnership of Atlanta Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202614676
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
4046180900
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,227,057
Expenses
$1,053,577
Assets
$2,431,710
Liabilities
$5,094

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RACHEL EPPS SPEARS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • RACHEL EPPS SPEARS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $178,841 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Pro bono partnership of atlanta is organized and operated exclusively to promote, encourage, assist, and provide volunteer legal services for nonprofit agencies serving poor and disadvantaged communities in the greater atlanta region.

What it reported doing in 2024

See schedule o for complete program service accomplishment description.legal education: pbpa maintains a website with over 170 articles, 140 recorded webcasts, and 39 podcasts on nonprofit legal topics. Pbpa's webcasts, which are presented live and offered for viewing afterward on demand, have been attended by 2,000+ live viewers and viewed on demand 5,000+ times. Podcast episodes have been downloaded over 2,000 times. When surveyed, 97% of respondents who listened to the podcasts were either very satisfied or satisfied with the content. Pbpa sends a nonprofit notes newsletter with timely legal alerts once a month to a distribution list of approximately 3000 nonprofit professionals and collaborates with other community organizations on in-person education programs. Pbpa also provides legal training specifically for emerging nonprofits executive directors through the nonprofit legal bootcamp for emerging leaders.

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 100% 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

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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.7%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 76.9%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th 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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.1%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.31; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 67.7% of revenue deployed · 76.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $811K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $179K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.