Astia

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
710927054
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4158572367
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Improvement, Capacity Building N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,380,654
Expenses
$1,227,261
Assets
$848,864
Liabilities
$50,478

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Sharon Vosmek (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Sharon Vosmek (CEO): $219,231 total reported compensation
  • VICTORIA PETTIBONE (CIO): $170,113 total reported compensation
  • OMAR ALI (CFO): $157,194 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To create a more equitable venture capital landscape.

What it reported doing in 2024

Astia access - the astia access program provides entrepreneurs with direct access to expertise and capital -- the foundational components of success for high-growth entrepreneurship. Astia advisors provide direct feedback via the expert sift screening process as well as customized advice in one-on-one sessions. Capital is raised by applicant companies via the sift in the form of astia's direct investment programs and/or investment from non-astia investors. The astia expert sift process is implemented via a software platform called astia connect. The astia investment program provides the great majority of the funding for the astia access program. In the future, as companies exit the astia portfolio, it is expected that 100% of the astia access program will be funded by astia investments.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 76.4%; rating input score 76
  • Program expense ratio: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $15.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 11.1%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 66.3%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.1% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 76.4% of revenue deployed · 85.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $219K · 11 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 25 of 27 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 40 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 51/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.