AHPA Foundation for Education and Research on Botanicals Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311578316
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Silver Spring, MD, USA
Phone
3015881171
Rating
44
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$14,375
Expenses
$61,820
Assets
$71,663
Liabilities
$5,128

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Elizabeth Lambert (Chair)
  • Jackie Greenfield (Trustee)
  • Mitchell Coven (Treasurer)

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

The American Herbal Products Foundation Inc is the education arm of the American Herbal Products Association. Its purpose is to promote education and research on medicinal, therapeutic and health-promoting herbs.

What it reported doing in 2024

Osha sustainability Study: AHPA Foundation awarded a $6,600 grant to University of Kansas to gather research data on the location and inventory of Osha (herbal plant) in the U.S. with the objective of producing information about the status of Osha in the wild.And, $17,454 grant to Appalachian Sustainable Development re: Goldenseal Sustainable Harvest Project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0

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: -330.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.16; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.3% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.