Pro Bono Resource Center of Maryland Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521664796
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, USA
Phone
4108379379
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,751,386
Expenses
$5,389,406
Assets
$4,782,406
Liabilities
$292,881

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

Leadership & pay

21 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANNA SHOLL (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ANIKA JONES (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • DAVID SCOTT GRAY (PRESIDENT)
  • IRV WALKER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • SHARON GOLDSMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHARON GOLDSMITH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $262,142 total reported compensation
  • ANNA SHOLL (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $220,246 total reported compensation
  • ANNE SPEEDIE (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $152,479 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 champion equitable access to justice for Maryland's marginalized communities by providing legal help, pioneering collaboration with partners, and advocating for economic and social justice.

What it reported doing in 2024

Training, recruitment and free legal assistance - the center recruits lawyers to engage in pro bono legal work and matches their expertise to the legal non-profit organization that can use their services. The center also educates the bar for both volunteer and staff lawyers by offering numerous courses covering a wide range of subjects including landlord-tenant, home preservation, family law, employment, elder law, foreclosure defense, immigration, veterans' benefits and consumer protection. Furthermore, the center serves as staff to the court's standing committee on pro bono legal services, offers technical assistance and support to pro bono referral agencies, manages the attorney litigation fund, coordinates pro bono mentors, operates a professional skills academy, and supports the local pro bono committees in each jurisdiction. The center's direct service projects focus on legal needs in particularly underserved areas, with legal clinics in courthouses and in at-risk communities.for more than a decade, pbrc has provided direct legal assistance to individuals and families in need through both courthouse and community clinics. Annually, the organization directly serves about 6,400 clients with free legal assistance in areas such as estates and trusts to preserve homeownership, foreclosure prevention, tax sale prevention, rental property eviction prevention, consumer debt defense and immigration triage. This work grows out of recognition of pockets of nonexistent services or underserved populations where pbrc was requested to step in to fill those gaps. Pbrc's success rate is extraordinarily high, engaging both staff and volunteers to advocate for their clients' interests and prevailing in most cases.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.2%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 17%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.1% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $4.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $262K · 21 people listed · 2 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 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.