Form 990 for tax year 2025

Totals

Total revenue

$12,561,957

Total expenses

$8,021,314

Contributions and grants received

$11,912,840

Grants paid

$0

Program service revenue

$110,258

Investment income

$483,611

Other revenue

$55,248

Total assets, end of year

$18,974,576

Total liabilities, end of year

$3,960,213

Net assets or fund balances, end of year

$15,014,363

Program services expenses (Part IX)

$5,145,195

Management and general expenses

$2,722,162

Fundraising expenses

$153,957

Program service expenses (Part III)

$5,145,195

Program services were 64.1% of total expenses calculated — Part IX's program-services column over total expenses, both as filed.

Line items

Every line the filer filed in Parts VIII, IX and X, as filed and in filed order. Blank columns are left out, and the lines are not forced to add up to the totals above.

Mission and programs · 2025

• SEE SCHEDULE OLEGAL SERVICES: THROUGH COMMUNITY-LED MOVEMENT LAWYERING AND A SYSTEMIC APPROACH, WE ARE SUPPORTING COMMUNITIES AND MOVEMENTS BY BRINGING DEEP LEGAL EXPERTISE THAT IS GROUNDED IN AND STRONGLY GUIDED BY AN UNDERSTANDING OF RACE EQUITY.CASES IN LITIGATION OR THAT HAVE BEEN LITIGATED DURING 2025:UNITED FARM WORKERS OF AMERICA, ET AL V. GREENWOOD MUSHROOM SUNNYSIDE IA, LLC:THIS LAWSUIT IS TO ENFORCE THE LITTLE NORRIS-LAGUARDIA ACT AND RETALIATION PROTECTIONS FOR UNION ACTIVITY.THE WORKERS WHO ARE IMPACTED ARE IMMIGRANTS AND LARGELY WOMEN. THESE WORKERS ARE FIGHTING FOR BETTER WORKING CONDITIONS FREE OF HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION AND THEY WANT TO IMPROVE THE WORKPLACE BY ORGANIZING. THIS LAWSUIT AIMS TO EMPOWER WORKERS BY ADDRESSING THE UNEQUAL BARGAINING POWER BETWEEN WORKERS IN PARTICULAR IMMIGRANT WORKERS AND EMPLOYERS. THIS CASE IS CURRENTLY ON APPEAL TO THE WASHINGTON SUPREME COURT. THE WASHINGTON SUPREME COURT WILL DECIDE WHETHER AN ARBITRATION AGREEMENT THE WORKERS SIGNED AFTER THE COMPANY THEY WERE WORKING FOR WAS TAKEN OVER BY GREENWOOD TO STAY EMPLOYED IS UNCONSCIONABLE. NO FEES HAVE BEEN SOUGHT AT THIS TIME.EVELIA GONZALEZ, ET AL V. GREENWOOD MUSHROOM SUNNYSIDE IA, LLC:THIS IS A CLASS ACTION TO ENFORCE THE FARM LABOR CONTRACTING ACT (FLCA) WHICH AFFORDS CIVIL PENALTIES TO FARM WORKERS WHOSE EMPLOYERS/CONTRACTORS FAIL TO REGISTER WITH THE STATE.THE CASE ALLEGES THAT GREENWOOD WAS A CONTRACTOR OF INSTAR AND WAS REQUIRED TO REGISTER AS A FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR. THE FAILURE TO REGISTER WAS A VIOLATION OF THE ACT, AS WELL AS THEIR FAILURE TO CARRY AND EXHIBIT A FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR LICENSE, FAILURE TO DISCLOSE THE EXISTENCE OF A BOND, AND FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE CLASS WITH REQUIRED DISCLOSURES. THESE FLCA REQUIREMENTS PROTECT FARM WORKERS, AS THESE DISCLOSURES HELP WORKERS UNDERSTAND WHO THEY ARE WORKING FOR AND WHAT THEY WILL BE PAID, AMONG OTHER THINGS. NO FEES HAVE BEEN SOUGHT AT THIS TIME.RAMON TORRES HERNANDEZ AND FAMILIAS UNIDAS POR LA JUSTICIA AFL-CIO V US DEPARTMENT OF LABOR:THIS CASE WAS FILED IN THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON STATE TO ENFORCE H-2A WORKER WAGE PROTECTIONS IN LIGHT OF THE ANNUAL DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL) CALCULATIONS FOR THE 2019 WAGES.THIS LAWSUIT WAS FILED TO COMPEL DOL TO PROPERLY CALCULATE PREVAILING WAGES IN WASHINGTON H-2A CONTRACTS. DOL'S CALCULATIONS UNDERMINE FARM WORKER WAGES AS THEY RESULT IN LOWER MINIMUM HOURLY WAGES INSTEAD OF TRADITIONALLY HIGHER EARNINGS BASED ON PIECE-RATE WAGES (WORKERS COMPENSATED BASED ON THE NUMBER OF POUNDS OR BINS OF FRUIT HARVESTED PER DAY). THE PROPER CALCULATION WOULD ENSURE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN HARVEST WAGES ARE PAID TO THOUSANDS OF FARM WORKERS.A FEE PETITION WAS FILED SEEKING $437,432.99 IN ATTORNEY FEES. HOWEVER, THE DISTRICT COURT CUT THE FEE REQUEST AND ONLY AWARDED $109,358.25. THE DISTRICT COURT'S ORDER WAS APPEALED. ON JUNE 25, 2026, THE APPEALS COURT REVERSED THE DISTRICT COURT'S FEE AWARD AND REMANDED THE CASE BACK TO THE DISTRICT COURT FOR AN UPWARD ADJUSTMENT OF THE FEE AWARD. FAMILIAS UNIDAS POR LA JUSTICIA AFL-CIO V US DEPARTMENT OF LABOR:THIS CASE WAS FILED IN THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON STATE TO ENFORCE H-2A WORKER WAGE PROTECTIONS IN LIGHT OF THE ANNUAL DEPARTMENT OF LABOR (DOL) CALCULATIONS AND TO CHALLENGE NEW PREVAILING WAGE REGULATIONS THAT TOOK EFFECT ON NOVEMBER 14, 2022. THIS LAWSUIT WAS FILED TO COMPEL DOL TO PROPERLY CALCULATE PREVAILING WAGES IN WASHINGTON H-2A CONTRACTS. DOL'S CALCULATIONS UNDERMINE FARM WORKER WAGES AS THEY RESULT IN LOWER MINIMUM HOURLY WAGES INSTEAD OF TRADITIONALLY HIGHER EARNINGS BASED ON PIECE-RATE WAGES (WORKERS COMPENSATED BASED ON THE NUMBER OF POUNDS OR BINS OF FRUIT HARVESTED PER DAY). THE PROPER CALCULATION WOULD ENSURE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN HARVEST WAGES ARE PAID TO THOUSANDS OF FARM WORKERS. IN ADDITION, THE CASE SEEKS TO CHALLENGE A NEW RULE THAT ELIMINATES PREVAILING WAGES AFTER ONE YEAR LEAVING NO PREVAILING WAGE IN PLACE AND REDUCING THE WAGES FOR FARMWORKERS. NO FEES HAVE BEEN SOUGHT AT THIS TIME.BELL V. WA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS:CHALLENGE THE STATE'S USE OF PRESUMPTIVE POSITIVE DRUG TESTING KITS WHEN SEARCHING FOR ILLICIT SUBSTANCES IN PRISON FACILITIES. THE CASE INVOLVES A POSSIBLE CLASS OF MORE THAN 1,000 PEOPLE WHO WERE SUBJECTED TO DRUG TESTING WITH A HIGH RATE OF FALSE POSITIVES. THE STATE RELIED ON THIS UNRELIABLE TESTING TO ACCUSE AND PUNISH PEOPLE FOR DRUG USE WITHOUT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE. AS A RESULT, MANY PEOPLE WERE PLACED IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, LOST GOOD CONDUCT TIME, AND REMAINED IN PRISON LONGER, DESPITE NOT COMMITTING THE ALLEGED INFRACTIONS AND HAVING NO MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE THE ACCUSATIONS. SEEKING REASONABLE ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS PURSUANT TO ANY APPLICABLE STATUTE OR COURT RULE. CASE IS ONGOING; NO FEES HAVE BEEN RECOVERED. TA'AFULISIA V. WA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES:SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ENFORCEMENT - CHALLENGE THE STATE'S TRANSFER OF 43 CLASS MEMBERS FROM A JUVENILE REHABILITATION FACILITY TO ADULT PRISON. THE CASE INVOLVED ENFORCING A LAW RECOGNIZING THAT YOUNG PEOPLE NEED ACCESS TO THE EDUCATION, PROGRAMING, THERAPEUTIC SERVICES, AND A HIGHER DEGREE OF SAFETY OFFERED BY JUVENILE REHABILITATION FACILITIES UP TO THE AGE OF 25. HOWEVER, THE STATE ROUTINELY TRANSFERRED YOUNG PEOPLE FROM ITS CUSTODY TO ADULT PRISONS WITH NO WARNING, PROCESS, OR OPPORTUNITY TO CHALLENGE THEIR TRANSFERS. EVEN AFTER A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT HAD BEEN REACHED BETWEEN THE PARTIES IN OCTOBER 2023, THE STATE CONTINUED ITS PRACTICE OF MOVING YOUNG PEOPLE UNDER THE AGE OF 25 TO ADULT PRISONS. FEES SOUGHT: $585,000.00 IN ATTORNEYS' FEES FOR SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ENFORCEMENT. RECEIVED IN 2026. K.J.H. V. WA DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING:CHALLENGE THE STATE'S PRACTICE OF SELLING CONFIDENTIAL AND SEALED JUVENILE RECORDS TO THIRD-PARTY BACKGROUND CHECK COMPANIES. THIS WAS A TEST CASE THAT WAS RESOLVED THROUGH THE STATE'S MEDIATION PROCESS. DURING MEDIATION, RECORDS REVEALED THAT OVER 1000 RECORDS HAD A SEALING ORDER BUT WERE NOT FLAGGED AS SEALED BY THE STATE'S SYSTEM. DISCOLSURE OF SEALED JUVENILE RECORDS CREATED BARRIERS TO PEOPLE IN SECURING HOUSING, JOBS, AND ANY OTHER OPPORTUNITY WHERE BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE UTILIZED. NO FEES WERE SOUGHT OR RECEIVED. AMICUS IN MIKRAE E. PRESTON V. SB&C, LTD:FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE WASHINGTON CODIFIED ITS CHARITY CARE LAWS, THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT WAS ASKED TO CONSIDER A QUESTION REGARDING A COLLECTION AGENCY'S DUTIES BEFORE COLLECTING ON A HOSPITAL DEBT FROM PATIENTS WHO HAD NOT BEEN SCREENED OR NOTIFIED OF THEIR ELIGIBILITY.COLUMBIA LEGAL SERVICES COLLABORATED WITH A PARTNER ORGANIZATION TO JOINTLY FILE AN AMICUS BRIEF IN THE WASHINGTON STATE SUPREME COURT IN SUPPORT OF PATIENT'S RIGHTS TO PRE-COLLECTION NOTICE. AMICI'S ARGUMENTS WERE ROOTED IN THE LEGISLATURE'S LONG-STANDING INTENT TO PROTECT CHARITY CARE ELIGIBLE WASHINGTONIANS FROM UNFAIR COLLECTIONS, THE CASCADE OF CONSEQUENCES RESULTING FROM A JUDICIAL SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS COLLECTION AGENCIES TO UNDERMINE THAT INTENT AND SECURE JUDGMENTS AGAINST CHARITY CARE ELIGIBLE CONSUMERS, AND THE GROWING RISK TO THE PUBLIC IF THIS PRACTICE IS NOT STOPPED DUE TO SWEEPING FEDERAL CHANGES TO MEDICAID ELIGIBILITY.NO FEES SOUGHT OR RECEIVED. CREDIT SERVICE V. QUIROZ:MEDICAL DEBT COLLECTION DEFENSE. CHALLENGE DEBT COLLECTOR'S ATTEMPT TO IGNORE WA LAW REQUIRING HOSPITALS AND COLLECTION AGENCIES TO OFFER AND ABIDE BY CHARITY CARE. VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL BY DEBT COLLECTOR. THIS WAS AN INDIVIDUAL CASE THAT WAS RESOLVED BY THE DEBT COLLECTOR'S VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL. THIS HELPS INFORM BROADER ADVOCACY AROUND HOSPITAL AND COLLECTION AGENCY PRACTICES. ENFORCEMENT OF THE CHARITY CARE LAWS, EVEN IN INDIVIDUAL CASES, HELPS REINFORCE TO HOSPITALS THAT THERE IS POTENTIAL LIABILITY IN EVEN THE SMALLEST MEDICAL DEBTS BEING IMPROPERLY SENT TO COLLECTION AGENCIES. NO FEES SOUGHT OR RECEIVED.

  Expenses $5,145,195 · Revenue $141,143

As filed on the 2025 return. The filer continues this part on Schedule O, which is not shown here.

Listed in Part VII

Compensation is as filed in Part VII: reportable pay from this organization and from related organizations, other compensation, and hours per week. The total, marked calculated, is our sum of the three dollar columns, with a blank column counted as $0; the form itself has no total. On a Form 990-EZ the columns are Part IV's instead, and on a Form 990-PF Part VIII's — compensation, contributions to benefit plans, and expense account — and the total sums those. A Schedule J breakdown is as filed: base pay, bonus, other, deferred compensation and nontaxable benefits from this organization, with any from related organizations beside each, and the filer's own total. It is shown with the Part VII listing of the same name on the same return. The form gives no key between the two, so that pairing is ours, and is marked matched by us.

Schedule J

Part I's answers as filed. A line not listed was left unanswered; on lines 1a and 3 that means the box was not checked.

Grants on this return

No itemized grants to organizations on this return.

Provenance

Return type

form_990

Tax year

2025

Filed

22 September 2026

IRS schema version

2025v4.2

Source object

202612669349300531

Check it against the return as filed: the GivingTuesday Data Lake hosts a public copy of the original XML.

The source document this was parsed from is served over the API, which is where bulk and document access live.