San Diego Advocates for Social Justice

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
330473843
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
6192338380
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$96,885
Expenses
$140,317
Assets
$149,967
Liabilities
$19,614

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PETER M LISS ESQ (President)
  • CHARLES T SCOTT ESQ (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • PETER M LISS ESQ (President)
  • CHARLES T SCOTT ESQ (Vice President)
  • WILLIAM RIVERA (Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

San diego advocates for social justice's mission is to expand affordable housing for the poor through legal advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2025, Affordable Housing Advocates (AHA) Tenants' Rights Project (TRP) provided self-help and referrals to 1,610 callers and closed 57 cases providing the following levels of assistance: Counsel and advise: 28Limited Services: 14 Negotiated settlement with litigation: 2Negotiated settlement without litigation: 4 Court decisions: 7Client withdrew: 2In the above closed cases, the following benefits were achieved for clients (with households with the following number of members).[No # of Households (Household members); Lump Sum Settlement / Ongoing Monthly Benefit / Elimination of Claimed Amounts / Reduction of Future Monthly Claims]-Prevented loss of housing: 18 (42) $0 / $0 / $1,282 / $0 -Negotiated move out with soft landing: 1 (1) $0 / $0 / $0 / $0-Enforced tenant's rights: 34 (76) $0 / $0 / $1,542 / $3,319-Enforced rights to safe and habitable housing: 10 (27) $0 / $0 / $0 / $0Totals 63 (146) $0 / $0 / $2,824/ $3,319Impact LitigationIn addition to the above individual cases, AHA's TRP along with co-counsel, the National Housing Law Project and the Public Interest Law Project, represent Del Island Tenants, an association of existing and displaced tenants, an affordable housing complex in the City of Coronado. We filed suit against the property owners and City to enforce state Affordable Housing Preservation Laws and ensure the continued affordability of this complex until the required 3-year, 12-month and 6 month notices are provided to all affected tenants, public and qualified entities and the time period for each has elapsed.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 93% 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.

The verdict

STRONG - 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: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 78.1%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -44.8%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.8% per year; rating input score 0; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 78.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $110K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.