Ai Safety Awareness Project Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
334395376
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Seattle, WA, USA
Phone
4255914476
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$421,793
Expenses
$204,825
Assets
$217,312
Liabilities
$344

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Changlin Li (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Changlin Li (Executive Director): $42,308 total reported compensation
  • Noah Wilson (Director of Operations): $42,308 total reported compensation
  • Andres Ramirez (Director of Partnerships): $42,308 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The AI Safety Awareness Project (AISAP)'s mission is to equip individuals and traditional pillars of American society with comprehensive knowledge of the current and future implications of artificial intelligence ("AI"). AISAP fulfills this mission via educational workshops across community centers, universities, churches, libraries, police departments and professional associations nationwide.

What it reported doing in 2025

Partner Eduction & Outreach Programs encompass all workshops, trainings and special programs developed for and presented before partners of AISAP, including our public library partners, public associations, and other established partners seeking specific AI Safety education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 58
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 9
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 82.3%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $49.84 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.4%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.06; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 82.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40% of revenue deployed · 82.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $169K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $42K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.