Project Scientist Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 461763945
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8337765724
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,949,573
- Expenses
- $1,782,214
- Assets
- $1,037,606
- Liabilities
- $475,761
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Patrice S Johnson (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Patrice S Johnson (CEO): $277,006 total reported compensation
- Casi Herrera (VP of Programmatic Growth and Strat): $143,255 total reported compensation
- Anushka Gole (VP of Communications): $125,324 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to expose a diverse population of young girls to a high quality STEM academy that inspires confidence in their pursuit of ling throughout the year
What it reported doing in 2025
Project Scientists Innovation Lab served 256 under-estimated youth through a joyful, hands-on, immersive summer STEAM camp designed to build confidence and spark curiosity in students. From building prototypes to solving real-world problems, each lab fosters collaboration, creativity, and problem-solving. Through field trips and connections with STEM role models, youth experience a sense of belonging and see themselves as innovative scientists and problem solvers.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 63
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 91
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 63.2%; rating input score 63
- Program expense ratio: 69.9%; rating input score 70
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.6%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.46; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 30.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 63.2% of revenue deployed · 69.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $277K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2014 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.