SEISMIC CATALYST FOUNDATION

Institutional Archetype

THE MEGAPHONE ON THE SHARED BOARD — Seismic Catalyst Foundation, which trades as Seismic Foundation, says what it is in one line: “Seismic Foundation is a non-profit organisation that operates as a center of marketing excellence, providing specialist marketing and communications capabilities” (Seismic Foundation). Its return says what it is for: “to make responsible AI a human priority by mobilizing public demand for meaningful global AI governance that ensures AI will be safe and beneficial for all” (ProPublica, Seismic Catalyst Foundation TY2025 Form 990). It is the fifth charity in a cluster that Ergo Impact sits in the middle of, and it is the one that faces the public rather than the funders or the evaluators. The return prints three directors, Michael Mccormick, Maximillian Henderson and Kellie Liket (Secretary), each at one hour a week and $0; its Schedule R lists Ergo Impact, Halcyon Futures, Fathom AI and Sentinel Bio as related; and Part V reports one gift, $87,500 from Halcyon Futures Inc (ProPublica, Seismic TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, Seismic TY2025 Schedule R). Liket is the same printed name on the Ergo Impact, Halcyon Futures, Fathom and Sentinel Bio returns. This profile scores the position, not the directors, the related charities or any campaign partner.

The finding is a channel. The evaluators, the state statute and the funders documented elsewhere on this site all make a policy ask; Seismic is the organization whose own pages say that “research alone has never changed policy” and that “public demand does” (Seismic Foundation, Why Seismic Exists). It does not name any of its four related charities anywhere on the pages read. The cluster is set out from the evaluators’ side in the evaluator alliances map; this page reads it from the audience end.

Mandate & Origin

Self-description. The home page: “Making responsible AI a human priority. Strategic marketing communications and campaign orchestration for the responsible AI movement.” Its goals include “Advocating for and communicating about industry standards outcomes that lead to controllable, beneficial AI for all.” Its method: “We use the power of media to raise awareness, build understanding of AI, create urgency, and encourage action among key decision-makers and their constituents.” Its offer to the rest of the movement: “Our partners bring the political expertise. We bring the orchestration, actionable audience intelligence, and creative firepower to make sure the issues break through” (Seismic Foundation; Seismic Foundation, Why Seismic Exists). Its stated reason to exist is a diagnosis: “the responsible AI movement has a communications gap. Not a knowledge gap, not a policy gap, but a storytelling gap.” The same post ends with a promise and a refusal: “We don’t just raise awareness about AI risk. We build the constituencies that make policymakers act,” and “not with more reports. Not with more conferences” (Seismic Foundation, Why Seismic Exists).

Origin. Seismic Catalyst Foundation, Wilmington, Delaware (211 W 9th St, 983), EIN 33-3325360, 501(c)(3), “Year of formation: 2025,” tax exemption issued August 2025 per ProPublica’s organization page, NTEE category Science and Technology Research Institutes, Computer Science (ProPublica, Seismic Catalyst Foundation; ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990). Its first Form 990 covers calendar 2025, was signed 20 April 2026 by Sander Volten and was prepared by Lane & Company CPAs of Washington, DC; its telephone is a Washington (202) number, and its website’s footer reads “Seismic Foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit EIN 33-3325360” (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990; Seismic Foundation). The poll behind its first report was in the field “from 16 June 2025 to 23 June 2025,” before the exemption date; the return does not say who commissioned that work or under what entity, and the profile does not infer it (Seismic Foundation, On the Razor’s Edge (PDF)).

Who runs it. The return’s principal officer and signer is Sander Volten, Chief Executive Officer, 40 hours a week, reportable compensation $271,971. Also listed: Alona Elkayam, Creative Officer ($133,170) and Philip Trippenbach, Strategy Director ($110,463), each at 40 hours. The site’s team section lists six people: Volten, “the former Global CEO of 180”; Alice Anselmi, Chief of Staff; Trippenbach, “20+ years in communications, innovation, and AI policy”; Malcom Glenn, Executive Director, who “leads North American strategy and campaigns to build public demand for responsible AI”; Nina Tihy and Isabella Scala. It names no board (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990; Seismic Foundation). The directors are on the return alone.

Governance on the return. Three voting members of the governing body, all three reported independent; no family or business relationship among officers, directors and key employees (Part VI line 2, No); 11 employees and 3 volunteers; the board contemporaneously documents its meetings (lines 8a and 8b, Yes). Part VI answers No to a written conflict-of-interest policy (line 12a), a written whistleblower policy (line 13) and a written document retention and destruction policy (line 14). Line 15 answers Yes to independent review of CEO and officer compensation, and Schedule O says it “INVOLVED AN INDEPENDENT COMPENSATION STUDY, WHICH INCLUDED COMPARABILITY DATA OF SIMILAR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS.” Schedule O’s answer on whether governing documents, conflict policy and financial statements were made available to the public is “NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.” No excess-benefit transaction, no loan or grant to an officer and no business transaction with an officer is reported (Part IV lines 25 to 28, all No); the return reports no severance, no deferred plan and no equity-based pay (Schedule J, lines 4a to 4c) (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule O; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule J).

Funding & Backers

Money in. TY2025 (calendar 2025, submitted 20 April 2026): revenue $5,248,744, every dollar contributions (Part VIII line 1f), program-service revenue $0, investment income $0; expenses $2,781,299 (program services $2,279,811, management and general $394,092, fundraising $107,396); net income $2,467,445; year-end assets $2,591,930 (cash $11,794, pledges and grants receivable $2,245,460, prepaid expenses $116,028, refundable deposits $218,648), liabilities $124,485, net assets $2,467,445 of which $221,985 without donor restrictions and $2,245,460 with. The balance sheet’s receivable and the restricted net assets are the same number (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule D; ProPublica, Seismic Catalyst Foundation). The return is its first: the prior-year columns are empty and net assets at the start of the year are $0.

Who the donors are. The public copy of Schedule B lists one contributor entry and prints the word “RESTRICTED” in both the name and total columns (ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule B). The site’s funding section reads: “Seismic is an independent 501(c)3 with a mission to reduce risks from AI by raising public awareness and engagement with the issue. We believe that to fulfill this mission, we must remain independent from commercial or political interests. Our funding policy follows strict guidelines designed to uphold this core value,” beside a “Download policy” button; no donor is named on the pages read (Seismic Foundation). Two records name a funder:

• Halcyon Futures. Seismic’s Schedule R, Part V line 1c, answers Yes to “Gift, grant, or capital contribution from related organization(s)” and Part V line 2 lists one line: Halcyon Futures Inc, transaction type C, $87,500, method of determining amount “COST.” That is 1.7 percent of revenue (ProPublica, Seismic TY2025 Schedule R). See Halcyon Futures.
• Survival and Flourishing Fund. The SFF-2026 Main Round table lists a recommendation by Jaan Tallinn of $7,000 to “Seismic Foundation,” legal recipient “Seismic Catalyst Foundation,” “General support” (Survival and Flourishing Fund, SFF-2026). See Survival and Flourishing Fund and Jaan Tallinn.

Together those two lines are $94,500 of the $5,248,744, and the return’s one restricted contributor is not stated to be either. Coefficient Giving’s site search for “Seismic” and “Seismic Foundation” returns only a 2024 staff-donations post and unrelated posts (Coefficient Giving, search “Seismic”). SFF’s 2024 and 2025 recommendation tables list no Seismic (Survival and Flourishing Fund, SFF-2024; SFF-2025).

Money out. Grants and similar amounts paid: $0 (Part I line 13). The money goes to staff and to production. Salaries and wages: officer compensation $277,853 (Part IX line 5) and other salaries $540,461, with $8,118 of pension and $18,604 of other benefits; occupancy $39,476; travel $87,247; legal $44,304; accounting $16,725. The two largest lines are “PRODUCTION EXPENSES” at $1,213,483 and “RESEARCH EXPENSES” at $150,000 (Part IX lines 24a and 24b). Part VII, Section B names the two independent contractors paid more than $100,000: The Corner Shop Productions Limited of London, “MEDIA PRODUCTION,” $986,944, which is 35.5 percent of total expenses; and Blue State UK Limited of London, “RESEARCH SERVICES,” $150,000 (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990). Neither contractor is named on any Seismic page read. Schedule F, Part I, reports one office in “EUROPE (INCLUDING ICELAND & GREENLAND),” 30 employees, agents and independent contractors there, “PROGRAM SERVICES,” “AI SAFETY RESEARCH AND EDUCATION,” $2,180,897, which is 78.4 percent of expenses; no grant to a foreign organization or individual (Part IV lines 15 and 16, No) (ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule F). Part IV line 4 and line 3 answer No to lobbying activities or a 501(h) election and to political campaign activity; Part IX line 11d (lobbying fees) is blank.

Compensation, as printed. Schedule J, TY2025: Sander Volten, CEO: base $271,971, retirement and deferred $3,598, nontaxable benefits $2,284, total $277,853 (271,971 + 3,598 + 2,284). Part VII adds Part VII column F “other compensation” of $5,882 for Volten, $4,788 for Elkayam and $303 for Trippenbach, and a total of $515,604 for the listed persons. The three directors’ columns are $0 on Seismic’s return (ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule J; ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990).

Institutional Voice & Intent

Seismic’s register is the agency pitch: campaign vocabulary (salience, orchestration, audience intelligence, cut-through) applied to AI risk, with a “Seismic Thinking” blog of essays on how the public reacts. It publishes a poll report, campaign analyses and short opinion pieces, not grants, policy texts or evaluations.

• On the problem: “AI is the defining issue of our generation. How it is developed, deployed, and governed will shape society for decades to come” (Seismic Foundation, Why Seismic Exists).
• On its method: “Awareness is one thing, raising cultural salience is another” (Seismic Foundation); “The moment that an issue has such institutional or societal salience that action becomes inevitable” (Seismic Foundation, Anthropic-Pentagon essay).
• On messengers: “The boos in Arizona are political information about a fight that is going to be won or lost in language, in messengers, and in frames that get picked up before the wrong ones harden” (Seismic Foundation, The Wrong Messenger).
• On its poll: “People think AI will worsen almost everything we care about, even as they rank AI low on their list of concerns” (Seismic Foundation, On the Razor’s Edge).
• On its own relatives, the site says nothing: no page read names Ergo Impact, Halcyon Futures, Fathom or Sentinel Bio. The Schedule R does.

Stated intent: “to make responsible AI a human priority by mobilizing public demand for meaningful global AI governance,” through “powerful storytelling and targeted media campaigns,” with a stated independence from “commercial or political interests.”

Observed intent: A first-year charity that reports $5.25MM of contributions, $0 of grants, $1.21MM of production spending (of which $986,944 to one London production company) and $150,000 of research, that ran a poll across five countries and, with the Center for Humane Technology, a New York subway campaign, and whose three directors, as printed, are the same names that sit on the funding, policy and biosecurity charities its Schedule R lists as related.

Gap: The independence statement is on the site and the funding policy behind it is a download. The return prints no donor, a related charity’s $87,500 and a board whose names the site never gives. The related charities’ pages and returns carry the structure; Seismic’s own pages carry the story. A reader who starts at the home page finds a marketing agency for responsible AI; a reader who starts at the return finds four relatives and a gift. The gap is structural: the audience-facing charity discloses its position in the cluster only on the IRS form.

Interest: The position Seismic argues is public demand for AI governance, “controllable, beneficial AI for all,” and the ties documented in the filings run to charities whose policy asks it would sell. What each would pay, as documented:

• A larger audience for the evaluators’ and Fathom’s ask. Position, in Seismic’s words: “We operate as a centre of marketing excellence and a force multiplier for organizations working on responsible AI policy, AI accountability, and ethical AI” (Seismic Foundation, Why Seismic Exists). What it pays: the demand side of a market in AI governance; Fathom, one of the four relatives on Seismic’s Schedule R, sponsors the statute under which the state designates evaluators; see Fathom. Best case, Seismic’s: “We don’t just raise awareness about AI risk. We build the constituencies that make policymakers act.” Who else gains: advocacy groups and policymakers that get a prepared public.
• Public concern as a funding case. Position, in the return’s words: “THE PUBLIC ARE DIRECT BENEFICIARIES OF THE FOUNDATION’S RESEARCH AND COMMUNICATION EFFORTS, RECEIVING TRANSPARENT, UNBIASED INFORMATION ON AI RISKS” (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990). What it pays: its own poll and campaigns show a worried public (46 percent “believe AI’s benefits will mostly go to the elites”), the audience that evaluator, policy and biosecurity funders point to. Best case, Seismic’s. Who else gains: Halcyon Futures, SFF and any funder that cites the poll.
• Messenger discipline. Position, in Seismic’s words: “The message was not the problem. It was the messenger.” What it pays: a case for who should carry the pro-engagement argument; “the work is to ensure it can be carried out by the people who can carry it credibly.” Best case, Seismic’s. Who else gains: whoever Seismic judges credible.

Interest is a documented fact about each position, not a claim about motive, and not a verdict that the argument is wrong. Each best case is stated at the strength its author states it.

Position in the Apparatus

The five returns, side by side. Each organization’s own most recent return, as printed (years differ by filer):

(ProPublica, Seismic TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, Seismic TY2025 Schedule R; ProPublica, Ergo Impact TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, Halcyon FY2024 Form 990; ProPublica, Fathom FY2024 Form 990; ProPublica, Sentinel Bio FY2024 Form 990). Seismic’s Schedule R gives every relative the same primary activity, “CHARITABLE PROGRAMS,” domicile DE, 501(c)(3), public-charity status “LINE 7,” direct controlling entity “N/A,” not a section 512(b)(13) controlled entity. Hours are the average weekly hours each return prints for that person at that filer.

Who is related to whom, as the filers print it. Seismic’s Schedule R, Part II, lists Ergo Impact Inc (447 Sutter St Ste 405, San Francisco, EIN 99-2339731), Halcyon Futures Inc (312 Arizona Ave 206, Santa Monica, EIN 93-3537739), Fathom AI Inc (447 Sutter St Ste 405, San Francisco, EIN 93-4840479) and Sentinel Bio Inc (1100 15th St NW Ste 400, Washington, EIN 99-3068480). Part VII, the supplemental explanation, is blank. The listings run in different directions:

• Ergo Impact’s TY2025 Schedule R lists Fathom AI, Halcyon Futures, Sentinel Bio and Seismic Catalyst Foundation, and reports no transaction with any of them (ProPublica, Ergo TY2025 Schedule R).
• Halcyon’s FY2024 Schedule R, for a year before Seismic existed, lists Fathom, Ergo Impact and Sentinel Bio (ProPublica, Halcyon FY2024 Schedule R).
• Fathom’s and Sentinel Bio’s FY2024 returns each answer No to the related-organizations question (Part IV line 34) (ProPublica, Fathom FY2024 Form 990; ProPublica, Sentinel Bio FY2024 Form 990).

The one dollar figure among them. Seismic’s Part V reports the $87,500 gift from Halcyon Futures Inc, as above. Ergo’s Schedule R, Part V, answers No to every transaction type. Whether Halcyon’s own FY2025 return reports the giving side is not known; it is not in the sources read.

Campaign partner. The one named partner on the pages read is the Center for Humane Technology. Its page “Stop the AI Drift” says: “Stop the AI Drift is an initiative from the Center for Humane Technology, in partnership with the Seismic Foundation,” and Seismic’s post describes the New York City subway ad run, “Stop the AI Drift,” “now through late October,” written by Casey Shea of the Center for Humane Technology and Alice Anselmi of Seismic. The page asks the visitor to contact representatives to “Hold AI companies legally responsible when their products cause harm, ban the manipulative designs that prey on people — especially kids, and give people control over their own data, face and voice” (Center for Humane Technology, It’s Not You, It’s AI; Seismic Foundation, The Public Isn’t Buying What the AI Industry Is Selling). Two of the essays read say “Originally published in The Fault Line”; the publication is not described on the pages read.

Seats. The directors are on Seismic’s return only: no Seismic page names a board. Ergo Impact’s page and the Sentinel Bio and AVERI pages tie Henderson and Liket to Ergo; see Ergo Impact, Max Henderson, Kellie Liket and Mike McCormick. The evaluator side of the cluster is set out on AI Evaluator Forum and Evaluator Alliances. Seismic is not itself an evaluator: nothing on its pages or return evaluates a model.

Beside the larger checkbooks. Seismic’s $5.2MM and $7,000 SFF line sit beside the SFF’s $63.13MM round and Coefficient Giving’s AI commitments; it is a campaign budget at a junction of larger funders (Survival and Flourishing Fund; Coefficient Giving, Emily Oehlsen, Sep 9 2026). See Survival and Flourishing Fund and Open Philanthropy (Coefficient Giving).

Actions & Leadership Choices

CONDUCT: STRUCTURAL — ONE CAMPAIGN CHARITY WHOSE DIRECTORS AND SECRETARY ARE PRINTED ON THE FUNDING AND POLICY CHARITIES THAT LIST IT AS RELATED, WITH AN $87,500 GIFT FROM ONE OF THEM. No wrongdoing is alleged. The structural point is the channel: a charity whose stated job is to move public opinion toward AI governance, funded in part by a related funder, with three directors whose names match the officers of that funder, of the adviser that lists it, of the policy sponsor and of the biosecurity fund, while the evaluators and funders publish standards that tell readers to look at funding relationships and organizational control. Seismic’s own best case is the plain one: it says it is independent, its board is entirely independent on its return, a related charity gave it seed money in its first year, and an audience-facing campaign charity naturally shares founders with the funders who wanted one built.

What it has done in a year. It formed, got its exemption in August 2025, and by its first return had 11 employees, an office and a 30-person European operation, a five-country poll of 10,000 people, a report, a subway campaign with a partner and eleven essays in nine months (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990; Seismic Foundation, blog). Its report says: “We polled 10,000 people across the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, and Poland” (Seismic Foundation, On the Razor’s Edge (PDF)).

Where the money goes. Of $2,781,299 in expenses, $1,213,483 is production, of which the return’s contractor table puts $986,944 with one London production company; research is $150,000, matching the one London research contractor; reportable compensation of the three paid people listed is $515,604. The return’s program narrative says the work “IS NON-PARTISAN.” The comparison is a filing fact: it measures where a first-year campaign charity spent, not what the campaign achieved.

The disclosure sits on the form. The return carries what the website does not: the related organizations, the directors and the gift. A reader who starts at seismic.org finds a team page of six staff and no board, a funding policy as a download and the line “Seismic is an independent 501(c)3”; a reader who starts at the Ergo, Halcyon, Fathom or Sentinel Bio return finds Seismic or the same two names.

Alliance Map

These run at the same time. One charity, one year on the IRS record, spends $2.78MM, $0 of it on grants, $1.2MM of it on production, lists four charities as related, each of which is run or sat on by the same names, and reports an $87,500 gift from the funder among them. The relatives disclose the individual ties themselves. The overlap is the finding.

Reach Assessment

Institutional: $5,248,744 of TY2025 contributions, $0 of grants, 11 employees and a 30-person European operation; three directors printed on the filing, one of whom is the same printed name across five returns; four related charities whose latest returns print $28,571,173 in gross receipts between them (years differ): Ergo $3,731,127, Halcyon $2,116,383, Fathom $12,128,490 and Sentinel Bio $10,595,173. Memetic: a marketing site with a blog of eleven essays, a 71-page report with a linked custom GPT, an Instagram account, a LinkedIn page and an X account, and a subway campaign through late October 2026 (Seismic Foundation; Seismic Foundation, On the Razor’s Edge).

Civilizational: For scale, the Survival and Flourishing Fund organized about $216MM since 2019 and Coefficient Giving says its technical AI safety, security and fieldbuilding commitments were $351 million in 2025 (Survival and Flourishing Fund; Coefficient Giving, Emily Oehlsen, Sep 9 2026). Seismic’s budget is a few percent of either; its weight is that it is the one organization in the cluster whose job is the audience.

Score note. Attack 4, defense 3 and hp 3 on first-hand receipts: the TY2025 return’s revenue, contractors, governance answers, Schedule B, Schedule R and Schedule F, the SFF-2026 table, and Seismic’s and its partner’s pages. Peers: Ergo Impact (4/3/3, hazard 33.3), the adviser on whose return Seismic is listed; level on all three, with Ergo’s reach in the related charities and Seismic’s in public attention. Halcyon Futures (5/4/3, hazard 40) is the funder with $611,455 in grants, a written conflict policy and two of three directors independent; Sentinel Bio (5/6/3, hazard 46.7) funds a Forum evaluator and names its supporters and a donor cap; Fathom (7/7/6, hazard 66.7) sponsors a state statute and has $12.1MM in receipts. At person level, Kellie Liket (4/4/4, hazard 40) and Max Henderson (5/5/4, hazard 46.7) score above the charity because their seats outlast any one return. Hazard 33.3 sits below Halcyon: reach one point lower and insulation one lower, entrenchment level.

Score basis. Atk 4 is reach: Seismic spent $2,279,811 on programs, $2,180,897 in Europe, $986,944 on one production contractor and $150,000 on research, and ran a poll, a report and a subway campaign; no statute, procurement rule or pre-release gate obliges a lab or agency to act on any of it, and it paid out no grants (ProPublica, TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule F). Def 3 is funding insulation: 100 percent of revenue is contributions from donors the public Schedule B does not name, $2,245,460 of net assets is donor-restricted pledges, all three directors are reported independent but Part VI answers No to written conflict, whistleblower and retention policies, Schedule O answers “NO DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC,” and the only named gifts are $87,500 from a related charity and $7,000 from SFF, so independence from whoever funds it cannot be shown, against Halcyon’s 4 and Sentinel Bio’s 6 (ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule B; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule O; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule R). Hp 3 is entrenchment: formed 2025, one return, cash of $11,794 against a $2,245,460 receivable, and nothing in statute or contract holding the seats or the campaign in place (ProPublica, Seismic Catalyst Foundation).

Sources: Seismic Foundation; Seismic Foundation, blog; Seismic Foundation, Why Seismic Exists; Seismic Foundation, The Wrong Messenger; Seismic Foundation, The Public Isn’t Buying What the AI Industry Is Selling; Seismic Foundation, Anthropic-Pentagon essay; Seismic Foundation, On the Razor’s Edge; Seismic Foundation, On the Razor’s Edge (PDF); Center for Humane Technology, It’s Not You, It’s AI; ProPublica, Seismic Catalyst Foundation; ProPublica, Seismic TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule B; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule D; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule F; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule J; ProPublica, TY2025 Schedule O; ProPublica, Seismic TY2025 Schedule R; ProPublica, Ergo Impact TY2025 Form 990; ProPublica, Ergo TY2025 Schedule R; ProPublica, Halcyon FY2024 Form 990; ProPublica, Halcyon FY2024 Schedule R; ProPublica, Fathom FY2024 Form 990; ProPublica, Sentinel Bio FY2024 Form 990; Survival and Flourishing Fund; SFF-2024; SFF-2025; SFF-2026; Coefficient Giving, search “Seismic”; Coefficient Giving, Emily Oehlsen (Sep 9 2026)