The Women's Law Center of Maryland

What it reported doing in 2024

Protection order advocacy & representation project (poarp): poarp represents victims of domestic violence at protection order hearings in baltimore and carroll circuit courts. The project's attorneys represent people who have been abused by an intimate partner (current or past boyfriend / girlfriend, current or ex-spouse) in proceedings to obtain protection orders, enforce protection orders through contempt, and modify existing protection orders. Multi-ethnic domestic violence project (medovi): the center provides advocacy and education to survivors of domestic violence in immigrant communities though medovi. This project provides representation to foreign born victims of domestic violence in vawa self-petitions, vawa battered spouse waivers, interim u-visa applications, as well as in final protection order hearings around the state of Maryland. The medovi staff work with foreign born clients who have been abused by an intimate partner. Any person with a language barrier can access the service because of the center's commitment to secure an appropriate language interpreter.collateral legal assistance for survivors project (clas) the clas project provides all the above services of poarp as well as representing victims of domestic violence, in collateral, primarily family-law related issues, as time and resources allow. These collateral issues include advocacy (sometimes out of court) and representation in divorce and custody proceedings, landlord/tenant matters, replevin cases, and criminal accompaniments. Representation includes the full array of legal services, including discovery, depositions, retention of experts, when necessary, settlement negotiations, and litigation. By retaining the attorney-client relationship after the protective order hearing for collateral issues, clas can provide client-centered and culturally sensitive services and to prevent the re-traumatization of clients who would otherwise be forced to relive and retell their stories to new attorneys, or more often, cannot find representation at all for these on-going issues.

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 69.3%; rating input score 69
• Program expense ratio: 80.4%; rating input score 80
• Fundraising efficiency: $14.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: Limited
• 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: 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: 13.9%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.19; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 17.4%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 6.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings