Who is greenpeace

TikTok star pleads not guilty to double murder in San Diego 3 hours ago. Siberia's rapidly melting permafrost is changing the landscape Oct 25, PM. Massive storms hit country from coast to coast Oct 25, PM. Gun violence: An American epidemic? Oct 25, PM. Instead, it relies on donations from foundations and individuals. The organization does not have a political action committee PAC. Charity Navigator awards Greenpeace just 2 out of 4 stars.

For the associated c 3 , see Greenpeace Fund nonprofit Greenpeace is one of the most internationally recognized environmentalist organizations. History Greenpeace had in origins in the opposition to nuclear weapons testing off the coast of Alaska.

Organization Greenpeace consists of Greenpeace International and 26 regional offices operating in 55 countries. Opposition to Fossil Fuels Greenpeace is opposed to the use and extraction of all fossil fuels, which power most of the world. Controversies Chevron Environmental Damage Lawsuit In , then-New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo threatened to investigate the energy company Chevron while the company was a defendant in a multi-billion-dollar lawsuit in Ecuador.

Related Profiles. Tracy Sturdivant Former Board Member. Kristin Engberg Former Executive Director. Antha Williams Former Board Member. Patrick Moore Co-Founder. Guillermo Quinteros Board Member. Paul Watson Co-Founder. Annie Leonard Executive Director.

Connor Gibson Investigative Researcher. Donald Ross Former Board Member. Fred Stanback Donor. Phil Radford Former Executive Director Associated Organizations. Child Organizations. Coalition Memberships. Donor Organizations. The incident began a string of violence by the French government toward Greenpeace, culminating in the bombing of the Greenpeace flagship, the Rainbow Warrior.

While the ship was docked in Auckland, New Zealand, preparing for a trip to Moruroa, French secret service agents planted two bombs on board and exploded the ship.

The bombing resulted in one fatality when a photographer, Fernando Pereira, drowned after the second blast. The French government initially denied responsibility for the bombing but eventually accepted blame. France's minister of defense resigned after New Zealand led an investigation into the events.

Despite the violence of its opponents, Greenpeace persevered. The organization launched a new Rainbow Warrior in and sent it back to Moruroa. The French finally ended their nuclear tests at Moruroa in As the small Don't Make a Wave Committee grew into the large, successful Greenpeace, its national and regional chapters began to argue over projects and methods.

The organization was fitfully expanding its mission to include environmental concerns beyond nuclear disarmament and peace. In the next section, we'll learn how Greenpeace grew into the international organization it is today. There are four ships that represent the organization. While Greenpeace's first protest at Amchitka Island had a clear, straightforward goal, its subsequent efforts lacked the same clarity.

Members interpreted the organization's ecological goals differently. National and regional chapters disputed tactics and projects. The brain scientist Dr. Paul Spong convinced some members of the Vancouver Greenpeace chapter to take up the cause of whales and defend them from hunters. Many volunteers were captivated by the mission that ultimately came to define Greenpeace, but others felt this pursuit was limiting and less important than protesting nuclear testing.

Such rifts between group members and between national and regional organizations threatened the solidity of Greenpeace. The organization needed an official governing body with an unambiguous mission and budget. This was the start of a unified mission and mindset for Greenpeace. A Slick Victory In , Greenpeace achieved one of its most notable victories.

Shell Oil had plans to scuttle a 14,ton oil storage facility called the Brent Spar in the North Sea. Activists scaled the Brent Spar and faced water cannon attacks by the United Kingdom government and Shell.

Although the United Kingdom maintained Shell's right to sink the colossus, the oil company eventually bowed to public protests and boycotts across Europe and promised to recycle the facility. Ultimately, Greenpeace's action contributed to an international ban on the ocean disposal of oil rigs.

This score estimates the actual impact a nonprofit has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact. Note: The absence of a score does not indicate a positive or negative assessment, it only indicates that we have not yet evaluated the organization. Do you work at Greenpeace Fund? Note: The absence of a score does not indicate a positive or negative assessment, it only indicates that the organization has not yet submitted data for evaluation.

This score provides an assessment of the organization's engagement with the constituents it serves, a practice we term Constituent Feedback. When organizations listen to constituents, they are able to better deliver on programs and meet the needs of stakeholders. A future version of this Beacon will also assess an organization's people operations and its Diversity, Equity and Inclusion DEI metrics.

Nonprofit organizations are encouraged to fill out the How We Listen section of their Candid profile. Constituent Feedback and Listening Practice data are not available for this organization. Charity Navigator believes nonprofit organizations that engage in inclusive practices, such as collecting feedback from the people and communities they serve, may be more effective. We award every nonprofit that completes the Candid survey full credit for this Beacon, in recognition of their willingness to publicly share this information with the nonprofit and philanthropic communities.

Although the data is not evaluated for quality at this time, future iterations of this Beacon will include third party or other data that will serve to validate the information provided by the nonprofit.

Our partnership with Feedback Labs and Guidestar by Candid , and other partners including Fund for Shared Insight, GlobalGiving, and Keystone Accountability, enables us to launch the first version of this beacon with Constituent Feedback information collected on Candid's site. Feedback practices have been shown to support better Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion outcomes, an essential area of assessment that we intend to further expand and develop in the future.

Feedback Labs has documented several studies which indicate that beyond achieving organizational goals, nonprofits that are attentive and responsive to concerns and ideas raised by beneficiaries establish stronger relationships with the people they serve, promote greater equity, and empower constituents in ways that can help to ensure better long-term outcomes.

You can find resources to help nonprofits improve their feedback practices here. The Giving Basket had an issue with your donation. Please try again. If the problem persists contact us and include your Cart ID: Unknown. Greenpeace Fund.

Less Greenpeace Fund is a c 3 organization, with an IRS ruling year of , and donations are tax-deductible. You are viewing this organization's new Charity Navigator profile page.

To view the legacy version, click here. Star Rated Report. Financial Performance Metrics. Fundraising Expenses. Fundraising Efficiency. Working Capital Ratio. Program Expense Growth. Liabilities to Assets. Program Expense. Program Expense Ratio Administrative Expenses 6. Fundraising Expenses Liabilities to Assets Ratio Working Capital Ratio 0. Program Expense Growth Governance Charity Navigator looks to confirm on the Form that the organization has these governance practices in place.

More The presence of an independent governing body is strongly recommended by many industry professionals to allow for full deliberation and diversity of thinking on governance and other organizational matters. Our analysts check the Form to determine if the independent Board members are a voting majority and also at least five in number. Less No Material Diversion of Assets More A diversion of assets — any unauthorized conversion or use of the organization's assets other than for the organization's authorized purposes, including but not limited to embezzlement or theft — can seriously call into question a charity's financial integrity.

This metric will be assigned to one of the following categories: Full Credit: There has been no diversion of assets within the last two years. Partial Credit: There has been a diversion of assets within the last two years and the charity has used Schedule O on the Form to explain: the nature of the diversion, the amount of money or property involved and the corrective action taken to address the matter.

In this situation, we deduct 7 points from the charity's Accountability and Transparency score. No Credit: There has been a diversion of assets within the last two years and the charity's explanation on Schedule O is either non-existent or not sufficient.

In this case, we deduct 15 points from the charity's Accountability and Transparency score. More Audited financial statements provide important information about financial accountability and accuracy. Partial Credit: The charity's audited financials were prepared by an independent accountant, but it did not have an audit oversight committee. In this case, we deduct 7 points from the charity's Accountability and Transparency score. No Credit: The charity did not have its audited financials prepared by an independent accountant.