American Academy of Dermatology
Legal name: American Academy of Dermatology Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 410793046
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Rosemont, IL, United States
- Phone
- (888) 462-3376
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Medical Disciplines
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $53,579,298
- Expenses
- $54,092,775
- Assets
- $128,462,497
- Liabilities
- $75,604,062
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
50 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TERRENCE A CRONIN JR MD (PRESIDENT (THRU - 3/2024))
- SEEMAL R DESAI MD (PRESIDENT (BEG - 3/2024))
- MARK KAUFMANN MD (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT (THRU - 3/2024))
- SUSAN TAYLOR MD (PRESIDENT-ELECT (BEG - 3/2024))
- ROBERT S KIRSNER MD (VICE PRESIDENT (THRU 3/2024))
- CYNDI J YAG-HOWARD MD (VICE PRESIDENT (BEG - 3/2024))
Highest reported compensation
- ELIZABETH K USHER (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO): $898,747 total reported compensation
- SARAH TANCREDI (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, OPERATIONS): $461,396 total reported compensation
- MELANIE TOLLEY HALL (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS): $441,697 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Advancing excellence in dermatology
What it reported doing in 2024
Science, research, quality and practice - includes the distillation and rating of evidence and dissemination of best practices in the practice of dermatology via clinical practice guidelines, performance measures, and other tools, scientific support for public and health policy messaging and educational programs, and survey research. Provide academy members with assistance and education related to appropriately running an efficient practice including compliance with relevant regulations, implementation of health information technology, quality improvement, and general practice management issues.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 60% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
- 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 72
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 34
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 80.1%; rating input score 80
- Program expense ratio: 73.5%; rating input score 73
- Fundraising efficiency: $9.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 89.5%; rating input score 89; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Limited
- Conducts field audits: Limited
- May suspend future funding: Limited
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Limited
- Requires grant agreements: Limited
- May require repayment: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 74%; rating input score 74; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 78.6%; rating input score 79; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.37; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.59; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 6.5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site
- Where the money goes: 80.1% of revenue deployed · 73.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 28 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $39.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $899K · 50 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $8.3M reported
- Consistency: 42 of 46 current checks pass · 4 findings to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 44 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.
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 29/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.