Defending Rights and Dissent Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270042821
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
7712109230
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Civil Rights

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,946,164
Expenses
$1,581,739
Assets
$3,393,878
Liabilities
$78,698

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sascha Meinrath (President)
  • Mike Rufo (Vice President)
  • Fadi Saba (Vice President)
  • Emily Berman (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Darakshan Raja (Director, MJF Proj): $153,281 total reported compensation
  • Susan Udry (Executive Dir.): $142,673 total reported compensation
  • Charles Gibbons (Policy Director): $122,557 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Defending Rights & Dissent strengthens our participatory democracy by protecting the right to political expression

What it reported doing in 2024

Empowering people to reclaim their right to know and freedom to act by making their voices heard by key decision makers and engaging in extensive public education through research materials, reports and public affairs programming that alert the American people to curtailments of fundamental rights, particularly in the Muslim community

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 72
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45%; rating input score 45
  • Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $29.26 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.1%; rating input score 93; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 46.3%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.15; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 19.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 24.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $153K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.