Wisconsin Law Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
396063515
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082573838
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$596,716
Expenses
$189,532
Assets
$3,854,093
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ATTY FRANCIS W DEISINGER (PRESIDENT)
  • HON CHARLES N CLEVERT JR (FELLOWS PRESIDENT)
  • ATTY DEANNE M KOLL (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
  • ATTY JILL M KASTNER (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
  • HON JOSEPH M TROY (PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MR LARRY J MARTIN (SECRETARY (SEE SCHEDULE O)): $292,191 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 promote public understanding of the law, improvement of the administration of justice and other law-related public service through funding of innovative and creative programs that improve the vision of the american justice system.

What it reported doing in 2024

To promote public understanding of the law, improvement of the administration of justice and other law-related public service through funding of innovative and creative programs that improve the vision of the american justice system including but not limited to the following programs: the belle case la follette awards recognize three recent law school graduates, who are state bar of Wisconsin members and practicing in Wisconsin, and who represent under-served populations, such as people of modest means and those who live in rural areas. One award is given to a graduate of the university of Wisconsin law school. One award is given to a graduate of marquette university law school. One award is given to a graduate of a law school located outside Wisconsin who is practicing in Wisconsin.the kathryn rasmussen bullon fund to enhance legal representation addresses the need for legal representation in underserved areas, often referred to as "legal deserts," by funding the rural practice development program. The goal of this state bar of Wisconsin administered program is to recruit three attorneys each year to practice law in a designated county in rural Wisconsin for at least two years. Options include starting a practice, joining a firm, or practicing in a government or nonprofit setting. An approved eligible attorney receives $5,000 at the start of the agreement and another $5,000 upon completion of the two-year commitment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 84% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 94% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - Most voting board members are independent and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 58
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 86
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 31.9%; rating input score 32
  • Program expense ratio: 47%; rating input score 47
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 66.6%; rating input score 67; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 68.2%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 20.33; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 18%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.8% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 31.9% of revenue deployed · 47% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $89K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $292K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.