Alternate Defenders Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680373829
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Rafael, CA, USA
Phone
4154921039
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Legal Services

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,705,563
Expenses
$1,649,047
Assets
$204,049
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLIE DRESOW (PRESIDENT)
  • DEBRA HOFFMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • MARY STEARNS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU 8/30/24))

Highest reported compensation

  • MARY STEARNS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (THRU 8/30/24)): $80,221 total reported compensation
  • DEBRA HOFFMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $71,122 total reported compensation
  • CAMILLE BOSWORTH (DIRECTOR): $29,176 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our organization contracts with marin county to refer qualified attorneys for appointments by the court to represent indigent defendants in criminal cases where the public defender has a conflict.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024-2025, adi provided criminal defense attorneys in 632 new conflict cases for indigent defendants. Adi paid attorneys, investigators and immigration consultants. Adi also reviewed bills for other appointed cases (e.g. Murder, writs of habeas corpus, and other post-conviction resentencing cases) and other ancillary bills for accuracy and reasonableness for direct payment by the county. Adi collaborated with county employees and other conflict panels to implement fair processes for the clients. Adi has a peer review committee for competency issues.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 92.2%; rating input score 92
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.12; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.6%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 92.2% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $80K · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2016 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.