Brooklyn Defender Services

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
113305406
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Brooklyn, NY, USA
Phone
(718) 254-0700
Rating
87
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Civil Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$92,802,949
Expenses
$89,398,081
Assets
$37,068,192
Liabilities
$32,043,195

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LISA SCHREIBERSDORF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LISA SCHREIBERSDORF (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $428,330 total reported compensation
  • LAURA SAFT (DEPUTY ED, MD CRIMINAL DEFENSE): $332,048 total reported compensation
  • LAUREN A SHAPIRO (MD OF FAMILY DEFENSE PRACTICE): $277,271 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Brooklyn Defender Services is a public defense office that provides outstanding representation and advocacy to people facing loss of freedom, family separation and other serious legal harms.

What it reported doing in 2024

In fy25, brooklyn defender services (bds) provided comprehensive legal representation to 28,695 low-income brooklyn and queens residents who were arrested, 1,610 parents in family court proceedings, 513 clients in detained immigration removal proceedings, and 2,543 clients facing barriers to civil justice. Bds employs a large staff of highly dedicated and talented attorneys, social workers, investigators and support staff to provide multidisciplinary client representation in our core areas of criminal, family and immigration defense to people facing the dire consequences of imprisonment, loss of their children or deportation as well as related housing, benefits, education, employment and other civil legal matters.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 98% 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. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 97
  • Accountability: 81
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $944.7 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.7%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.41; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.86; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.3%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 10.9% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 8 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $78.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $428K · 14 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.8M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 37 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 50/100.