Democracy Defense Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990888028
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
8008294933
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,991,247
Expenses
$6,830,805
Assets
$3,154,449
Liabilities
$706,614

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEFFREY KAPLAN (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JEFFREY KAPLAN (DIRECTOR AND PRESIDENT)
  • LARRY ROGERS (DIRECTOR AND TREASURER)
  • MICHAEL PALMER (DIRECTOR, VP & SECRETARY)

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

The purpose of the democracy defense project is to rebuild confidence in the electoral process by creating a bipartisan coalition and empowering trusted voices to talk about election integrity and begin to rebuild americans' faith in our election system.

What it reported doing in 2024

Democracy defense project is organized and operated to rebuild trust in america's electoral process by uplifting trusted voices from both political parties to publicly and persistently defend the american electoral process, promote election integrity, and rebuild trust in the american electoral system. Ddp created a bipartisan coalition to lead this work through a coordinated communications and public education campaign at the national level. Specifically, the organization works with like-minded organizations to promote positive changes in administration and legislation to rebuild faith in the electoral system, works with academic institutions and think tanks to promote studies on the safety of america's decentralized vote-counting system, promotes thoughtful ideas and dialogue about how to continue to improve the system, and educates reporters who cover the election on the process of vote counting in advance of election day.

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 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 99.1%; rating input score 99
  • 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 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: 2.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.46; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.9% of revenue deployed · 99.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $6.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 1 filing year from 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.
  • 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: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.