Future Problem Solving Program of California Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
680286884
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Stanford, CA, USA
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,532
Expenses
$64,498
Assets
$11,019

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Erwin Hosono (President)
  • Lisa Chand (Vice President and Treasurer)

People named in this filing

  • Erwin Hosono (President)
  • Lisa Chand (Vice President and Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our organization provides an academic program teaching crucial problem-solving skills to 4th to 12th-grade students. We conduct five academic competitions annually across California benefiting over 1,000 students. Affiliated with Future Problem Solving Program International in Melbourne FL our culminating April event gathers students at a California campus for in-person competition. Due to the pandemic we transitioned to online contests. Our program is sustained by volunteers evaluators and two contractors. The Board comprises solely volunteers who do not receive any compensation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Since 1984 we have been instructing California students in critical and creative problem-solving skills. Numerous students have achieved notable academic and professional success. Two co-affiliate directors deliver continuous program services to students and teachers both in-person and online.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 68% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.5%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.17; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 15% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -14.8% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 5 of 5 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.