Think Tank Science & Art Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
992559201
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Los Angeles, CA, USA
Phone
3106502140
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Reported finances

Revenue
$47,427
Expenses
$11,545
Assets
$36,342
Liabilities
$460

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ELAD OFFER (President & CEO)

People named in this filing

  • ELAD OFFER (President & CEO)
  • THERESE OFFER (Director&Treasu)
  • CHRIS LEE (Director&SEC)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

For any legal purpose allowed under the law geared towards providing equitable access to quality science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics(steam)education to learners of all ages.

What it reported doing in 2024

In alignment with our mission to expand access to hands-on steam education, think tank served multiple schools across los angeles with mobile classroom programs that reached over 500 students in our first year. We provided in-school workshops, after-school classes, and community outreach events, each designed to promote creativity, technical skills, and confidence through real-world, project-based learning. These efforts directly advanced our exempt purpose by delivering equitable, high-impact educational experiences to students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 77
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 75.7%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.15; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.