Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
366150906
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3128994730
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,590,629
Expenses
$3,448,692
Assets
$41,930,200
Liabilities
$431,470

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEANNE BRANDSTETTER (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • WYLECIA WIGGS HARRIS (CEO)
  • SUSAN BURNS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • WYLECIA WIGGS HARRIS (CEO): $824,071 total reported compensation
  • MARY BETH WHALEN (COO): $479,988 total reported compensation
  • PAUL A MIFSUD (CFO): $340,575 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Through philanthropy, empower current and future food and nutrition practitioners to optimize global health.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation prioritizes opportunities that align with its mission to take a leadership role by advancing education and research efforts. This may be achieved through scholarships, awards, fellowships, research grants and public education.scholarshipsinvest in current and future food and nutrition practitioners through scholarships to dietetics students all levels of study.awardsleadership awards given to practitioners recognize the outstanding achievements of dietetics professionals, encouraging individuals to realize excellence in new and developing areas of food and nutrition.research and fellowshipssupport efforts to expand prospective, evidence-based food and nutrition research interventions that advance the academy and its members as the nutrition experts; provide fellowship opportunities to demonstrate the value of dietetics professionals; effectively advocatefor scaling evidenced-based solutions; and amplify the contribution of the food and nutrition workforce.public educationsupport the expansion of the kids eat right and future of food programs, which provide valuable food and nutrition information and resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 71% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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: 80
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.9%; rating input score 91
  • Program expense ratio: 75.3%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.43 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd 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: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 24.9%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 12.16; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.9% of revenue deployed · 75.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $824K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 35 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 17 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 18 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.