American Assoc of Neuromuscular & Electrodiagnostic Medicine

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
416036691
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Rochester, MN, USA
Phone
5072880100
Rating
51
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Private Grantmaking Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,634,157
Expenses
$6,879,801
Assets
$12,066,202
Liabilities
$1,352,843

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • FAYE CHIOU TAN (PRESIDENT)
  • LISA D HOBSON-WEBB (PRESIDENT EL)

Highest reported compensation

  • SHIRLYN ADKINS (EXECUTIVE DI): $320,663 total reported compensation
  • JACOB SOKOL (IT DIRECTOR): $173,043 total reported compensation
  • JAY SCHWINEFUS (MEMBERSHIP &): $165,408 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 improve the quality of patient care and advance the science of nm diseases and edx medicine by serving physicians and allied health professionals who care for those with muscle and nerve disorders.

What it reported doing in 2024

Aanem recruits and serves over 7000 members by delivering cme education, industry news, networking, and advocacy to advance quality patient care in neuromuscular and electrodiagnostic medicine. Aanem provides peer-reviewed content (muscle & nerve invited reviews, monographs, and expert clinical perspectives), a biyearly newsletter (aanem edge-news), educational podcasts, online and printed learning material related to edx and nm medicine, and patient/provider resources. Aanem's membership and educational work can be viewed on aanem.org.. These activities strengthen professional competence and inform patients and the public about diagnostic procedures and treatment options. The goal is to improve the care of patients with neuromuscular diseases.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 72% 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

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 92
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -3.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.75; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 14.3%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $321K · 17 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $533K reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 56/100.