Hypnosis Motivation Institute
Legal name: Behavioral Science Centers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237198104
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Tarzana, California, United States
- Phone
- 1-818-758-2700
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Vocational, Technical Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,977,543
- Expenses
- $7,289,356
- Assets
- $10,607,126
- Liabilities
- $6,249,154
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- George Kappas (Director&Presid): $276,090 total reported compensation
- Richard Ortiz (Director): $168,333 total reported compensation
- Sandra Kappas (Direct/Tres/Sec): $145,665 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 provide nationally accredited education and training in hypnotherapy, preparing students for certification and professional practice.
What it reported doing in 2024
Behavioral Science Centers provides educational services in the form of hypnotherapy training to students. The institution also provides free information and self-improvement classes about the benefits of hypnotherapy to the public through in-person and online classes. Behavioral Science Centers additionally provides numerous pro-bono, one on one, and group hypnotherapy services through its community outreach program.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. 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: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 66
- Accountability: 71
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57.5%; rating input score 58
- Program expense ratio: 64.9%; rating input score 65
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 50%; rating input score 50; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.46; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.3%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 26.4% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 57.5% of revenue deployed · 64.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $276K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 50/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.