Center For the Advancement of Science In Space Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
275410763
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Merritt Island, FL, USA
Phone
3214033088
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and Public Policy Analysis

Reported finances

Revenue
$17,343,230
Expenses
$17,833,864
Assets
$5,235,596
Liabilities
$2,982,244

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Ramon Ray Lugo III (President & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ramon Ray Lugo III (President & CEO): $403,366 total reported compensation
  • Francisco Cordova (Chief Operating Officer): $368,654 total reported compensation
  • Michael Roberts (Chief Scientist): $304,751 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Established through congressional authority and supported by NASA via cooperative agreement #80JSC018M005, the CASIS mission is to foster scientific discovery and technological innovation in space, expand U.S. leadership in commercial space, and inspire the next generation.

What it reported doing in 2024

CASIS manages the International Space Station U.S. National Laboratory, under cooperative agreement with NASA. As a public service enterprise, the ISS National Lab allows researchers to leverage this multiuser facility to improve quality of life on Earth, mature space-based business models, advance science literacy in the future workforce, and expand a sustainable and scalable market in low Earth orbit. CASIS enables and facilitates access to research resources on the ISS in support of non-NASA science, technology, and education initiatives from U.S. government agencies, academic institutions, and the private sector.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 99% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 81.7%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.8%; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -2.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.5%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.2% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83% of revenue deployed · 81.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $403K · 18 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $202K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 58 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 49 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.