Responsible Artificial Intelligence Institute
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 843488959
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2021–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023
- Location
- Austin, TX, USA
- Rating
- 53
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Science and Technology N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,743,850
- Expenses
- $1,603,009
- Assets
- $252,722
- Liabilities
- $41,703
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Seth Dobrin (Executive Director)
- Manoj Saxena (President and Director)
- Matt Sanchez (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Seth Dobrin (Executive Director): $126,541 total reported compensation
- Carla Edwards (Secretary): $78,370 total reported compensation
- Manoj Saxena (President and Director): $58,765 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Collaboratively guide and focus the responsible use of Artificial Intelligence to maximize benefits for humankind and the environment.
What it reported doing in 2023
Establishing and building a responsible AI certification mark Responsible AI Check and defining responsible AI with practical tools and expert guidance on data rights, privacy, security, explainability, and fairness.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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 - Most voting board members are independent and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 49
- Transparency & Controls: 47
- Accountability: 72
- Sustainability: 36
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 47%; rating input score 47
- Program expense ratio: 51.1%; rating input score 51
- Fundraising efficiency: $15.41 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 13th 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: 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: 8.1%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 104% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 47% of revenue deployed · 51.1% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $820K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $127K · 4 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $125K reported
- Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2021 to 2023
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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 47/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 52/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.