Climate Defense Project
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 813513347
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Laguna Beach, CA, USA
- Phone
- 7819560709
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Natural Resources Conservation and Protection
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $293,320
- Expenses
- $482,072
- Assets
- $405,510
- Liabilities
- $196
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
People named in this filing
- Alexander Marquardt (Executive Dir.)
- Joseph Hamilton (Treasurer & Secretary)
- Wayne Hsiung (Board Member)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Climate Defense Project offers free, comprehensive, movement-aligned legal support to climate justice and anti-extractive campaigns, and to community-led efforts that intersect with these issues. We support front-line communities, connect attorneys with experts and community members, and provide direct representation to people engaged in civil disobedience, direct action, and other forms of nonviolence.
What it reported doing in 2024
Climate Defense Project assisted dozens of attorneys, several social justice campaigns, and hundreds of clients engaged in work on climate justice and related issues. This assistance took the form of direct representation in litigation, including trials, hearings, and depositions; conducting legal research; drafting legal documents; supervising interns; and providing trainings on law- and organizing-related subjects. Particular focuses of this work were pipeline resistance campaigns in Minnesota and West Virginia, student activist campaigns in New Hampshire and elsewhere, tribal sovereignty issues in Minnesota, and emergency work on behalf of immigrants and protesters in Minnesota and West Virginia.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 93% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 69
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 76.2%; rating input score 76
- Fundraising efficiency: $25.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -64.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.84; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 14.7% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 76.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $367K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.