Far Ai Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920692207
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Diego, CA, USA
Phone
7074353451
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Engineering and Technology

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$24,293,765
Expenses
$8,602,996
Assets
$23,022,514
Liabilities
$562,647

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ADAM GLEAVE (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ADAM GLEAVE (PRESIDENT/CEO): $237,604 total reported compensation
  • KARL BERZINS (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $191,204 total reported compensation
  • CONOR MCGURK (FISCALLY SPONSORED PROJECT DIRECTOR): $163,965 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Founded in 2022, far.ai, inc. Is a California non-profit dedicated to making advanced ai safe and beneficial for everyone. Far.ai conducts and supports technical ai research, continued on sch o

What it reported doing in 2024

Research programs far.ai conducts technical research to address fundamental artificial intelligence ai safety challenges. In 2024 we published 12 research papers with acceptances at leading venues such as the international conference on learning representations iclr, the international conference on machine learning icml, and the neural information processing systems conference neurips. We partnered with government-led ai security initiatives and conducted red-teaming engagements on frontier ai systems. We also supported external researchers through collaborations, mentorships, and/or operational support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 47
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 78
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 32.7%; rating input score 33
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 14th 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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 64.6%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.68; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.1%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 116.2% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 100.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 100.2% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 32.7% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $7.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $238K · 8 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Document-retention policy not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.