The Supreme Court Historical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237420574
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025430400
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,909,945
Expenses
$3,185,388
Assets
$17,857,371
Liabilities
$140,975

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

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS C LEIGHTON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • E BARRETT PRETTYMAN (PRESIDENT EMERITUS)
  • NEAL KATYAL (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CARTER G PHILLIPS (PRESIDENT)
  • JONATHAN D SCHILLER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RICHARD A SCHNEIDER (VICE PRESIDENT, CHAIR PROG)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES C DUFF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $212,000 total reported compensation
  • MARTHA MEEHAN-COHEN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $193,523 total reported compensation
  • CLARE CUSHMAN (DIR. OF PUBLICATIONS): $143,100 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 society is dedicated to the collection and preservation of the history of the supreme court of the united states. It was founded by chief justice warren e. Burger, who served as its first honorary chairman. The society accomplishes its mission by conducting educational programs, supporting historical research, publishing books, journals, and electronic materials, and by collecting antiques and artifacts related to the court's history. These activities and others increase the public's awareness of the court's contributions to our nation's rich constitutional heritage.

What it reported doing in 2024

Educational programs: secondary school teachers: the society and street law, inc. Offer the supreme court summer institute for secondary school teachers. The institute improves the level of instruction on the judicial system at the secondary school level, reaching students while they are developing an awareness of their rights and duties as citizens. Teachers observe the court in session, review actual cases under consideration, and hear lectures by experts on the court. The teachers then produce lesson plans for classroom instruction and train other teachers in techniques for incorporating the court into the social studies curriculum. This program has more than 750 alumni from almost every state and u.s. Possession. The society and street law have collaborated to bring the supreme court institute to teachers around the country who might otherwise not be able to attend the summer program. Teachers in atlanta, New York and st. Louis have participated in the regional supreme court seminar.civics education: the supreme court and my hometown is the national civics program of the supreme court historical society. This initiative engages high school students in a thorough study of the process and substantive issues of a case decided by the supreme court of the united states in a unique and personalized way. Participants learn how the judicial branch interacts with the other two branches of government and their role and responsibilities as active citizens. Hometowns also encourages students to interact with their local government and community based on what they have learned in the study. A distinguishing feature of this program is the focus on supreme court cases that originated in the students' hometowns and local courts. Both the constitutional questions and procedural history of the cases are explored through a local lens. The course of study immerses students in a review of the facts, trials, and appeals that led to supreme court decisions. At the end of the inquiry sessions, students complete a capstone project that further solidifies their learning and enhances their creative skills. Each final project is unique to each community and is specifically designed to promote increased understanding of the impact of the case.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% 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

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -9.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.61; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 25.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 77.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 103 of 103 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $212K · 27 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $460K reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.