AIA San Francisco

Legal name: Aia San Francisco - a Chapter of the American Institute of Architects

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
940896340
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, California, United States
Phone
415.874.2620
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,891,553
Expenses
$2,782,857
Assets
$14,717,449
Liabilities
$9,194,761

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

Leadership & pay

31 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANTON FOSS (EXCOM VP/PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • DANIEL PEREZ (EXCOM IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • FRANCESCA OLIVEIRA (EXCOM PRESIDENT)
  • STACY WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • STACY WILLIAMS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $190,177 total reported compensation
  • AMY RESS (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $127,178 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To maintain and enhance our industry as a whole.

What it reported doing in 2024

Aiasf continues to provide robust professional development, networking, and public engagement opportunities through a wide range of programs, tours, lectures, and forums that connect architects, designers, and the broader community to the built environment. In 2024, the chapter returned to a full calendar of in-person and hybrid programming, led by 20 active knowledge communities hosting monthly meetings, continuing education sessions, and special events. More than 2,000 participants attended these programs, which offered aia learning units, leadership development, and industry insights to support members at all career stages.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 64% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 32
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -47.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.29; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.62; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.2% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 31.8% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $190K · 31 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $456K reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 11 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 32/100.