Skip to content
Foundation of the American Board of Trial Advocates at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Foundation of the American Board of Trial Advocates

To preserve, promote, and improve the American civil justice system and the Seventh Amendment right to civil jury trials for future generations.

$238k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$78k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Crime & Legal$269kPublic Benefit$191kYouth Development$128kMembership Benefit$126kEducation$95kPhilanthropy$30kInternational$25kScience & Tech$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $216,824, the rows itemized in this filing. The $238,324 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $21,500 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $127k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $78k
$15,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$3.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEX-ABOTA Inc$78,353
Delaware Law Related Education Center Inc$24,000
Teach Democracy$22,500
Monroe County Bar Association$20,000
Loyola Law School$15,000
Arizona Bar Foundation (Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education)$15,000
Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts$10,000
Center for Youth Development Through Law$10,000
Civics Learning Project$10,000
Tampa Bay Chapter of ABOTA$6,596
Mecklenburg Bar Foundation$5,375
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Arizona Bar Foundation (Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education): $15k → 11%Delaware Law Related Education Center Inc: $24k → 10%The Rendell Center for Civics and Civic Engagement: $11k → 6%Monroe County Bar Association: $20k → 12%Pennsylvanians for Modern Courts: $10k → 22%Center for Youth Development Through Law: $10k → 10%Teach Democracy: $23k → 14%YOUTH SAFETY AND CIVILITY ALLIANCE: $5k → 5%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $5k → 8%Texas Watch Foundation: $15k → 10%TEX-ABOTA Inc: $78k → 14%University of South Carolina: $25k → 16%Arkansas Mock Trial Foundation Inc: $20k → 17%Center for Strategic and International Studies: $25k → 14%MIAMI CHAPTER-JURY POLL: $8k → 15%Michigan Center for Civic Education: $15k → 16%AMERICAN MOCK TRIAL ASSOCIATION-CHAMPIONSHIPS: $25k → 18%Classroom Law Project: $25k → 12%North Carolina Mock Trial Program: $8k → 12%Civics Learning Project: $15k → 13%NORTH CAROLINA MOCK TRIAL PROGRAM: $8k → 16%INDIANA BAR FOUNDATION: $10k → 16%Illinois Institute of Technology: $10k → 14%National Center for State Courts: $25k → 7%THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE: $25k → 10%CENTER FOR YOUTH DEVELOPMENT THROUGH LAW: $10k → 10%Teach Democracy: $10k → 14%TEXAS WATCH FOUNDATION: $15k → 10%San Antonio Chapter of ABOTA: $76k → 14%Classroom Law Project: $10k → 12%Center for Youth Development Through Law: $10k → 10%LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL: $15k → 14%TEX-ABOTA: $61k → 14%Civics Learning Project: $10k → 12%CENTER FOR YOUTH DEVELOPMENT THROUGH LAW: $5k → 10%Loyola Law School: $15k → 14%Tex-ABOTA: $44k → 14%Center for Youth Development Through Law: $10k → 10%Constitutional Rights Foundation: $25k → 14%Colorado Chapter of Abota: $21k → 14%CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION: $13k → 14%Tex-ABOTA: $15k → 14%CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION: $8k → 14%South Carolina Chapter ABOTA: $13k → 14%Tampa Bay Chapter of ABOTA: $10k → 14%Tampa Bay Chapter of ABOTA: $7k → 14%ABOTA National: $6k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
MI
OR
NV
IN
PA
CA
MO
VA
DE
AZ
AR
NC
SC
DC
TX
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

50%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$444k · 8 repeat orgs$436k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +45% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
18

Total granted

$444k
$339k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+23%

Still filing today

63%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $97k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Crime & LegalEducationPhilanthropyInternationalEmploymentPublic BenefitOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • TD
    Teach Democracy
    4× · 2019–2023 · $55k · revenue +223%
  • CL
    Civics Learning Project
    4× · 2020–2024 · $55k · revenue +45%
  • LM
    LOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2019–2024 · $30k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • AB
    AMERICAN BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATES
    one grant, 2022 · $76k
  • AM
    AMERICAN MOCK TRIAL ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +41%
  • NC
    NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTSgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +68%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
The Ohio Center for Law Related Education

The ohio center for law related education is a non-profit, nonpartisan organization that encourages participation in our democracy through active learning programs about law and citizenship for educators and students involving volunteers…

—
2
National Civil Justice Institute

The objectives and goals of the institute shall be to receive and administer funds for the purpose of providing and supporting educational programs for lawyers, legal academics, and members of the judiciary, conferences and publications…

—
3
American Law Institute

The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…

Crime & Legal
4
American Bar Foundation

The american bar foundation (abf) seeks to expand knowledge and advance justice through innovative, interdisciplinary, and rigorous empirical research on law, legal processes, and legal institutions. to further this mission the abf…

Crime & Legal
5
Thomas Jefferson School of Law

The mission of the school is to provide outstanding legal education in a collegial and supportive environment with attention to newly emerging areas of law, particularly those related to technological development, globalization and the…

Education
6
Roger Williams University School of Law

The only law school in Rhode Island, Roger Williams University School of Law offers future attorneys a rigorous, hands-on legal education in a supportive, personalized environment. Preparing students for success in the public and private…

Education
7
Arkansas Bar Association

The purposes of the arkansas bar association include the following: advance the administration of justice; foster and maintain on the part of attorneys high ideals of integrity, learning, competence and public service, and high standards…

—
8
The American College of Trust and Estate Counsel

Enhance the ability of actec members to provide the most efficient and highest quality services to their clients; develop qualified trust and estate counselors; improve and reform probate, trust and tax laws, procedures, and standards of…

Community Improvement
9
Lawyers for Civil Justice

The purposes for which the corporation is organized are to provide a means for defense trial lawyers and others to be heard, state a position and motivate reform of the United States civil justice system. See Schedule O

—
10
New England Lawboston

New england law/boston dedicates itself to preparing students to be successful lawyers and leaders in the public and private sectors through integrated practical, theoretical and ethical education of the highest caliber and to contributing…

Education
11
North Carolina Bar Association

The north carolina bar association is organized for the purposes of promoting and improving the administration of justice in north carolina; fostering and encouraging law reform when in the public interest; advancing the science of…

—
12
Minnesota State Bar Association

Minnesota state bar association promotes the highest standards of excellence and inclusion within the legal profession, provides valued resources to its members, and strives to improve the law and the equal administration of justice for…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education; the most unlike its peers is Arkansas Mock Trial Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 32 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/21
Grantees still filing
12/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATES: $197,607 · OtherAMERICAN BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATESAMERICAN BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATES: $76,021 · OtherAMERICAN BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATESTeach Democracy: $55,000 · OtherTeach DemocracyUSC School of Medicine Greenville: $25,000 · OtherTHE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE: $25,000 · OtherTeach Democracy: $22,500 · OtherAMERICAN BOARD OF TRIAL ADVOCATES: $20,750 · OtherTHE MONROE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION: $20,000 · Other+7 more: $77,743 · Other+7 moreLOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY: $30,000 · EducationLOYOLA MARYMOUN…AMERICAN MOCK TRIAL ASSOCIATION: $25,000 · EducationAMERICAN MOCK T…DELAWARE LAW RELATED EDUCATION CENTER INC: $24,000 · EducationDELAWARE LAW RE…ARKANSAS MOCK TRIAL FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · EducationARKANSAS MOCK T…NORTH CAROLINA MOCK TRIAL PROGRAM: $15,000 · EducationNORTH CAROLINA …Illinois Institute of Technology: $10,000 · EducationIllinois Instit…Civics Learning Project: $55,000 · Crime & LegalCivics Learning…NATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS: $25,000 · Crime & LegalNATIONAL CENTER…ARIZONA FOUNDATION FOR LEGAL SERVICES & EDUCATION: $15,000 · Crime & LegalARIZONA FOUNDAT…PENNSYLVANIANS FOR MODERN COURTS: $10,000 · Crime & LegalPENNSYLVANIANS …INDIANA BAR FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Crime & LegalINDIANA BAR FOU…Mecklenburg Bar Foundation: $5,375 · Crime & LegalCenter For Youth Development Through Law: $45,000 · EmploymentTEXAS WATCH FOUNDATION: $30,000 · PhilanthropyUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropyCENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: $25,000 · InternationalTHE RENDELL CENTER FOR CIVICS AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT: $11,000 · Public Benefit
Other$519,621Education$124,000Crime & Legal$120,375Employment$45,000Philanthropy$35,000International$25,000Public Benefit$11,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTeach Democracy: $55,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetCivics Learning Project: $55,000 over 4y, 2.5% of budgetCenter For Youth Development Through Law: $45,000 over 5y, 4.2% of budgetTEXAS WATCH FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 2y, 41% of budgetLOYOLA MARYMOUNT UNIVERSITY: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN MOCK TRIAL ASSOCIATION: $25,000 over 1y, 6.6% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR STATE COURTS: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetDELAWARE LAW RELATED EDUCATION CENTER INC: $24,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetTHE MONROE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA MOCK TRIAL PROGRAM: $15,000 over 2y, 8.8% of budgetThe Michigan Center for Civic Education: $15,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetARIZONA FOUNDATION FOR LEGAL SERVICES & EDUCATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE RENDELL CENTER FOR CIVICS AND CIVIC ENGAGEMENT: $11,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetPENNSYLVANIANS FOR MODERN COURTS: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetINDIANA BAR FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetIllinois Institute of Technology: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMecklenburg Bar Foundation: $5,375 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE3.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Foundation of the American Board of Trial Advocates funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Foundation of the American Board of Trial Advocates. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 53%
  • Delaware Law Related Education Center Inc: 53% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 32 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Foundation of the American Board of Trial Advocates’ filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home