American Association of Bioanalysts

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
946114214
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
St Louis, MO, USA
Phone
3142411445
Rating
36
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,451,243
Expenses
$6,229,514
Assets
$8,195,880
Liabilities
$4,711,547

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • John J Weiss PhD (President)
  • Melanie Clemmer PhD HCLD (CRB PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • Warren Eric Vanderslice PhD (PTS CHAIR): $286,535 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTINE M MYERS (SR OPER - PTS): $172,407 total reported compensation
  • OSCAR E REGALADO (IS/IT MGR - PTS): $141,594 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization is committed to the pursuit of excellence in clinical laboratory services by enhancing the professional skills of each of its members; promoting more efficient and productive operations; offering external quality control programs; collaborating with other professional associations and governmental agencies; promoting safe laboratory practices; and educating legislators, regulators, and the general public about clinical laboratory tests and procedures and provides clia approved external quality control proficiency program.

What it reported doing in 2024

Production and dissemination of educational materials, maintenance of professional compentency of members, and providing a forum for the exchange of information and knowledge and provides clia approved external quality control proficiency program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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

REVIEW - 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: 68
  • Accountability: 55
  • Sustainability: 40
  • 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: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.4%; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.32; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.57; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.4% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.6% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 14 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $287K · 20 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $3.2M reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 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.

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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.