Arizona Center for Law in the Public Interest
Public records show a registered, tax-exempt organization in good standing.
What it says it does
THE ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST IS A NON-PROFIT LAW FIRM DEDICATED TO ENSURING GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY AND PROTECTING THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF ARIZONANS.
- Income
- $800,566
- Spending
- $939,744
- Spent on programs
- 88%
- Reserves
- 5.8 months of spending
- Largest source of income
- donations and private grants, 78%
- Employees
- 6
- Volunteers
- 27
- Highest pay
- $168,465, executive di
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Financial health
Good: 70 out of 100. Higher than 39% of charities in its peer group (civil rights, $250k to $1m).
Reserves
20 of 35Spendable reserves would cover 5.8 months of spending.
Debt
20 of 20It owes 5% of what it owns.
Living within its means
0 of 15Spending exceeded income by 17% of income.
Income trend
15 of 15Income rose 28% on the year before.
Spending floor
15 of 1588% of spending went to programs and raising each dollar of donations cost 6 cents.
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Governance
Strong: 93 out of 100. Higher than 85% of charities in its peer group (civil rights, $250k to $1m).
Independent board
25 of 2527 of 27 voting board members are independent.
Conflict of interest policy
15 of 15Has a written conflict of interest policy.
Whistleblower policy
8 of 8Has a written whistleblower policy.
Record keeping policy
0 of 7Reports no written policy on keeping and destroying records.
Board minutes
5 of 5Keeps minutes of board meetings.
Board sees the tax return
10 of 10Gave the board a copy of this return before filing it.
Pay set independently
5 of 5Sets its chief executive's pay through independent review and comparison.
Independent check of accounts
15 of 15Its accounts were audited by an independent accountant.
No reported misuse
10 of 10Reports no diversion of assets, excess benefits or loans to insiders.
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Impact evidence
Describes programs. Its tax return describes what it does but we have found no measurable results in it.
Programs described in its return (1)
- $828,040 spent. THE ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ("ACLPI- OR "THE CENTER") ONLY LITIGATES CASES THAT SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. IN 2024, OUR CASES ALL SERVED THE BROAD PUBLIC INTEREST. IN ALL OF THE CENTER'S CASES, WE DO NOT CHARGE OUR CLIENTS ATTORNEYS' FEES. ARIZONA RECOGNIZES THE PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL DOCTRINE AND HAS SPECIFIC STATUTES THAT PROVIDE FOR AN AWARD OF FEES FOR THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY. UNDER THIS DOCTRINE, THE CENTER WILL SEEK ATTORNEYS' FEES FROM THE ADVERSE PARTY (THE STATE OF ARIZONA). 1. THE CENTER IS LITIGATING A CASE AGAINST THE STATE OF ARIZONA FOR ITS FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY FUND THE CAPITAL NEEDS OF ARIZONAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THIS CASE IS ACTUALLY A FOLLOW UP CASE TO ONE THAT THE CENTER SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATED 30 YEARS AGO. AS A RESULT OF THAT CASE, FUNDS WERE PROVIDED TO BRING ALL DILAPIDATED SCHOOLS UP TO STANDARD, AND MONEY WAS TO BE PROVIDED TO KEEP ALL SCHOOLS IN GOOD SHAPE. THE LEGISLATURE SUBSEQUENTLY DE-FUNDED MOST OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED AS PART OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE OLD CASE, AND ARIZONA IS ONCE AGAIN IN A SYSTEM UNDER WHICH A SCHOOL DISTRICTS ABILITY TO MEET ITS CAPITAL NEEDS DEPENDS TO A VERY LARGE EXTENT ON THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY WEALTH IN THE DISTRICT. IN 2024 THE CASE FINALLY WENT TO TRIAL. THE CENTER THEN PARTICIPATED IN POST- TRIAL BRIEFING THROUGH THE END OF 2024. (IN 2025 WE RECEIVED A RULING AND WE PREVAILED, THOUGH LEGISLATORS HAVE STATED PUBLICLY THAT THEY WILL APPEAL.) IF THE CENTER IS ULTIMATELY SUCCESSFUL, THEN THE STATE WILL BE FORCED TO IMPLEMENT A SYSTEM THAT COMPLIES WITH THE GENERAL AND UNIFORM CLAUSE IN THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. THIS CASE WILL HELP THE APPROXIMATELY 900,000 TO 1,000,000 CHILDREN IN ARIZONAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THE CASE IS CAPTIONED, GLENDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT V. STATE OF ARIZONA. THE NAMED PLAINTIFFS ARE FOUR ARIZONA SCHOOL DISTRICTS AS WELL AS THE ARIZONA SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, THE ARIZONA SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS ASSOCIATION, THE ARIZONA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, AND AN INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER. THE CENTER HAS SUBMITTED A FEE APPLICATION ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2025 AND IS AWAITING A RULING FROM THE COURT. 2. THE CENTER SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATED A CASE AGAINST THE STATE OF ARIZONA ON BEHALF OF ALL OF ARIZONAS FOSTER CHILDREN. THIS CASE IS A CLASS ACTION, WHERE IN ADDITION TO THE GENERAL CLASS OF ALL FOSTER CHILDREN THERE ARE SUBCLASSES THAT PERTAIN TO SUBSETS OF CHILDREN (E.G., THOSE WHO RECEIVE MEDICAID SERVICES, AND THOSE WHO ARE PLACED IN NON-KINSHIP SETTINGS). THE CASE WAS BROUGHT BECAUSE THE STATE (1) FAILS TO PROVIDE REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE SERVICES TO ARIZONA'S FOSTER CHILDREN; (2) FAILS TO ASSURE THAT FOSTER CHILDREN RECEIVE APPROPRIATE MEDICAL, DENTAL, AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CARE; (3) UNREASONABLY PLACES CHILDREN IN CONGREGATE CARE SETTINGS (WHICH NEGATIVELY IMPACT CHILDREN); (4) UNREASONABLY SEPARATES SIBLINGS; AND (5) FAILS TO TIMELY AND ADEQUATELY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ABUSE OF CHILDREN WHILE IN CARE; AND MANY OTHER DEFICIENT PRACTICES. THE STATE VIGOROUSLY CONTESTED WHETHER THIS CASE MAY PROCEED AS A CLASS ACTION. THE CENTER (AND CO-COUNSEL) HAVE ACHIEVED VICTORIES ON THIS QUESTION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, AND THAT RULING WAS LARGELY AFFIRMED ON APPEAL IN THE 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. THE CASE IS KNOWN AS B.K. V. MCKAY AND THE STATE OF ARIZONA. THE CASE SOUGHT BROAD RELIEF ON BEHALF OF ALL CURRENT AND FUTURE FOSTER CHILDREN, AND OBVIOUSLY SERVES A BROAD PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PARTIES ENTERED INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT COURT IN EARLY 2021. THE CENTER WILL CONTINUE TO BE INVOLVED IN MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. IN 2024, WE INITIATED A MEDIATION/DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS DUE TO THE STATE'S FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS AS REQUIRED BY THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. MONITORING IS ONGOING. PURSUANT TO THE COURT-ORDERED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, ATTORNEY FEES FOR MONITORING RECEIVED DURING 2024 WERE 75,000. IN AUGUST 2024, THREE YEARS INTO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, THE PLAINTIFFS INVOKED THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT ALLEGING THAT THE STATE HAD NOT REDUCED PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN IN CONGREGATE CARE, NOR INCREASED FAMILY FOSTER HOME OPTIONS, NOR INCREASED TREATMENT FOSTER HOMES CAPACITY, NOR ENSURED CHILDREN RECEIVED THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES THEY NEED. JUDGE KEN FIELDS IS THE MEDIATOR APPOINTED BY THE COURT. HE ATTEMPTED THROUGH MEDIATION TO REMEDY THE DISPUTE. ULTIMATELY, MEDIATION WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL AND THE ISSUE OF THE STATE'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT IS BEFORE JUDGE FIELDS. WE EXPECT A RULING BY DECEMBER 31, 2025. 3. THROUGHOUT 2024, THE CENTER CHALLENGED AN ILLEGALLY DISCRIMINATORY "GRID ACCESS CHARGE" CREATED IN THE LAST ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ("APS") RATE CASE. IN 2022, APS FILED AN APPLICATION SEEKING AN INCREASE IN CONSUMER ELECTRIC RATES BEFORE THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION ("ACC"). THE CENTER INTERVENED ON BEHALF OF MULTIPLE NON-PROFITS. AT THE END OF A SIX-WEEK HEARING, THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ISSUED A REOMMENDED OPINION AND ORDER THAT CONTAINED, FOR THE FIRST TIME, A "GRID ACCESS CHARGE" THAT WAS SPECIFIC ONLY TO ROOFTOP SOLAR CUSTOMERS (AND THUS ILLEGALLY DISCRIMINATORY UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS). OVER OBJECTIONS BY NUMEROUS PARTIES (INCLUDING THE CENTER'S CLIENT VOTE SOLAR), THE ACC APPROVED THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE IN DECEMBER 2023. VOTE SOLAR, ALONG WITH THE STATE OF ARIZONA AND ANOTHER INTERVENOR, FILED APPLICATIONS FOR REHEARING, CITING THE ILLEGALITY OF THE DISCRIMINATORY CHARGE UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAW, AS WELL AS THE VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS RIGHTS BECAUSE THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE WAS NEVER LITIGATED IN THE HEARING. IN APRIL 2024, THE ACC GRANTED A LIMITED REHEARING ON THE LEGALITY OF THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE, AND 10 DAYS OF REHEARING WERE HELD IN OCTOBER-NOVEMBER 2024. THE ACC AGAIN APPROVED THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE IN DECEMBER 2024, AND THE PARTIES APPEALED IN JANUARY 2025. THE CENTER WAS ASSISTED IN THE REHEARING AND THE SUBSEQU
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2024, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Legitimacy checks
Is it registered with the IRS? Passed.
Listed in the IRS master file of tax-exempt organizations as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated September 7, 2026.
Has the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status? Passed.
Not on the IRS automatic revocation list.
Source: Automatic revocation of exemption list, Internal Revenue Service, file dated September 30, 2026.
Are donations tax-deductible? Passed.
On the IRS list of organizations eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions.
Source: Publication 78 data: organizations eligible for tax-deductible contributions, Internal Revenue Service, file dated September 10, 2026.
Is it keeping up with its IRS filings? Passed.
Most recent return on file covers the year ending December 2024.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated September 7, 2026.
How long has it been tax-exempt? Passed.
Recognized by the IRS since December 1994.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated September 7, 2026.
Is it in good standing with state regulators? Passed.
Not on California's list of charities barred from soliciting. Other states are not yet checked.
Source: May Not Operate or Solicit for Charitable Purposes list, California Attorney General, Registry of Charities and Fundraisers, file dated October 7, 2026.
Ratings and checks are our reading of public records, using the published method. They are not a statement about anyone's honesty. If you work for this organization, you can send corrections or results, confirm you want gifts through Veridonate, or ask to be removed from giving.