American Advertising Federation DC Chapter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
530172316
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Phone
2029640419
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$30,849
Expenses
$26,706
Assets
$17,351
Liabilities
$5,224

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kyle Knauff (Vice President)
  • Gretchen Carswell (Past President)
  • Lindsay Matthews (President)

People named in this filing

  • Kyle Knauff (Vice President)
  • Tony Kosack (Board Member)
  • Durecia Moorer (Board Member)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

AAFDC's mission is to be the premier industry organization for area advertisingprofessionals to develop value-oriented and relevant programs, services and eventsand to expand and grow current and prospective members in the Washington metroadvertising community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Present awards to recognize models in the advertising industry and recognize creative excellence. The winners go on to a national competition conducted by the American Advertising Federation

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.4%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.65; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -31.1% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $53K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 7 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III program expenses within total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.