Science for America Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
882763460
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Cambridge, MA, USA
Phone
8577993522
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
General Science

Reported finances

Revenue
$659,896
Expenses
$4,409,039
Assets
$16,903,781
Liabilities
$239,623

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ERIC S LANDER (CHAIR & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAITLIN BROWMAN (COO & TREASURER): $369,488 total reported compensation
  • ZARA BURKE (SCIENTIST): $326,075 total reported compensation
  • ARIEL CARMELI (SCIENTIST): $265,977 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Science for america is a "solutions incubator" rooted in bold scientific and technological possibilities working to develop vision, strategy, and execution plans, and to ensure the launch and success of those solutions science for america brings together scientists and technologists and works with partners across sectors to:-identify potential game-changing solutions to urgent challenges, in the us and around the world, that are not currently happening, -develop clear vision, strategy and execution plans, and-ensure the launch and success of those solutions, by incubating them to an appropriate stage.possible solutions may include the creation of projects, initiatives, shared facilities, coalitions, new companies, prizes, and advocacy efforts.

What it reported doing in 2025

Stem equity and education - we wanted to better understand which groups are underrepresented in stem, how much are they underrepresented by, and are some universities doing better than others at diversifying their stem student population. We started by looking at relative representation: the representation of a group relative to their representation in a baseline population. Calculating a given population's representation in stem at a college compared to that population's baseline representation in the same college's overall population may allow us to evaluate current demographics to see if there are patterns of over or under representation for certain groups in stem, relative to their representation across that university as a whole.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 56%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 16th 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -568.1%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.83; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.1%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 45.2% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.1% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 42.6% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 56% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $369K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.