Civic AI Security Program Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934182617
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
4152941991
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$976,565
Expenses
$406,955
Assets
$608,293
Liabilities
$5,226

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Lucas Emmanuel Hansen (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Siddharth Hiregowdara (Co-Founder): $161,892 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

CivAI is a nonprofit that spreads knowledge about AI capabilities and dangers in a unique way. Instead of research papers and abstract discussion, we produce interactive software experiences that provide a deep, intuitive sense of what AI can do and where its going. We present these demos to targeted audiences and make scalable versions available to the public. CivAI is aiming for a world where people deeply grasp AI capabilities, and make better decisions because of it. This is a world that holds AI developers responsible for the externalities they are producing, while also finding use cases that transform lives for the better. CivAIs work brings a new kind of evidence to the discourse - simple, intuitive, and incontrovertible because users can interact with it firsthand.

What it reported doing in 2024

During 2024, CivAI built and presented educational software demonstrations of artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities and risks, focusing on cybersecurity, election security, and misinformation. Our interactive demos provided tangible, firsthand experience with frontier AI technology to help diverse audiences understand its implications. Many of these demonstrations are publicly accessible on our website, https://civai.org, with titles including The Future of Phishing, Giving AI the Rorschach Test, and Deepfake Sandbox. We delivered over 60 presentations using these demos, to audiences across civil society, government, and media.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 69
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.5%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 84.6%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $97.94 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 58.3%; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.49; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.8%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

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

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.5% of revenue deployed · 84.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $344K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 34/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.