Global Academy of Science and Arts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
920423130
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Milpitas, CA, USA
Phone
6506639050
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$975,915
Expenses
$1,019,836
Assets
$692,494
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • TOM ZHANG (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • MING ZHANG (Director)
  • TOM ZHANG (CEO)

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

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

Overview

Mission

To provide an innovative education program by connecting aspiring entrepreneurs, investors and business executives with world leading educators, researchers and scientists in order to foster technical innovation, sustained entrepreneurship and academia-industry collaboration.

What it reported doing in 2025

GASA launched the Japan Program to further expand its international educational initiatives and provide participants with direct access to world-class scientific and cultural resources in Japan. Centered around leading academic institutions such as The University of Tokyo and Kyoto University, the program invited distinguished scientists, university professors, and researchers to deliver lectures and interactive discussions on topics including life sciences, material sciences, advanced technology, and interdisciplinary innovation.Similar to the SV and Boston programs, the Japan Program combined academic learning with cultural exploration, offering participants opportunities to engage with local history, traditions, and contemporary Japanese society. The program included lectures, seminars, institution visits, networking activities, and cultural experiences designed to foster cross-cultural understanding and intellectual exchange.The target audience and objectives of the Japan Program were consistent with GASAs broader mission: to build a communication platform connecting entrepreneurs, students, educators, and science enthusiasts with leading global scholars and innovators. Program costs covered venue rentals, speaker honorariums, logistical coordination, educational materials, transportation, and other related operational expenses. As a non-profit organization, GASA remains dedicated to promoting education, international collaboration, and the advancement of science and technology.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 99% 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

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 45
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.7%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.4% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 18% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 32/100.