Project Defending Life Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 412199203
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2010, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Albuquerque, NM, USA
- Phone
- 5052664100
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Reproductive Rights
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,107,970
- Expenses
- $1,083,661
- Assets
- $618,449
- Liabilities
- $176,644
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DOMINIQUE DAVIS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- DOMINIQUE DAVIS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $110,000 total reported compensation
- JACQUELYN SENA (FORMER DIRECTOR & NURSE MANAGER): $80,600 total reported compensation
- MIRANDA WOFFORD (CFO): $59,704 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See sch o
What it reported doing in 2025
La luz women's centers offer limited-medical services including medical-grade pregnancy testing, limited obstetric ultrasounds to confirm pregnancy, std/sti testing and treatment, and pregnancy options information. La luz women's center served 583 women and saw 393 babies saved! During this time, 94% of women we served were at-risk for abortion. La luz home visiting offers supportive services through a home-visiting program, a state initiative to provide families parenting education and support, early childhood intervention, advocacy, referrals, material support, and more.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 73% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 62
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 30
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 77%; rating input score 77
- Program expense ratio: 78.8%; rating input score 79
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.51 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- 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; 64th 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.2%; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.57; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 23.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 77% of revenue deployed · 78.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $854K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $110K · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 37/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.