Climate Science Legal Defense Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
471941171
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
6468010853
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Science and Technology N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$465,503
Expenses
$414,719
Assets
$1,297,929
Liabilities
$27,207

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • LAUREN KURTZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • LAUREN KURTZ (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $103,400 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See schedule othe climate science legal defense fund (csldf) protects the scientific endeavor by putting our legal expertise to work for scientists who are threatened or silenced for doing their jobs. Our efforts and educational resources preserve and expand scientists' rights and strengthen legal protections to promote scientific integrity.

What it reported doing in 2024

The climate science legal defense fund works to educate the scientific community about their rights and their responsibilities regarding legal issues surrounding their work, as well as educate the public on legal issues facing scientists. The climate science legal defense fund also serves as a clearinghouse for information related to legal actions taken against scientists in order to provide lawyers representing scientists with information about past cases and strategies. The climate science legal defense fund takes an active interest in litigation involving scientists, including helping raise funds for scientists' defense, serving as a resource in finding pro bono representation, filing court papers urging the protection of science and scientists, and providing support during difficult litigation or threatened litigation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 54.4%; rating input score 54
  • Program expense ratio: 60.8%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 26; 26th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 10.9%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.13; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.9%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 54.4% of revenue deployed · 60.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $252K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $103K · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 54/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 26/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.