American Association of Birth Centers

What it reported doing in 2024

The association promotes and supports birth centers by working with members, conducting workshops and seminars and promoting ongoing research.- membership in 2024, aabc served 1,271 members (229 organizational members, 828 organizational staff members, and 214 individual members)see additional information on schedule o.-education offerings: - how to start a birth center workshops online (31 learners) - how to start a birth center in-person (30 learners) - learning collaborative for birth center sustainability (94 learners) - aabc birth institute (minneapolis, mn) (250 participants and 29 education sessions) - community birth assistant training program (48 learners) - birth center onboarding training program (59 learners) - dei foundations training on-demand (20 learners) - birth center focused nrp trainings 36 classes (396 learners) - 7 live webinars with a total of 106 participants - 31 on-demand webinars (533 learners)- curbside consulting - conducted 18 sessions with a total of 30 participants- irc office hours conducted 9 sessions with a total of 111 participants- perinatal data registry 75 active sites contributed data. Total pdr records at end of 2024 was 193,907. - standards for birth centers (637 downloads)- diversity + inclusion scholarships awarded 19 scholarships for the aabc birth institute, how to start a birth center workshop, or community birth assistant trainingtoolkits on the following topics: - birth center protocols (87 downloads) - clia compliance for birth centers (38 downloads) - risk management + sentinel events (48 downloads) - coordination + collaboration with ems for safe, timely transfers (47 downloads) - best practices in birth center regulations (305 downloads) - billing for facility services (89 downloads) - birth center contracting (64 downloads) - engaging employers, contractors and payors (24 downloads)- white paper "getting payment right: how to unlock high-value care through appropriate birth center reimbursement" (122 downloads)-research activities:- published: -- bovbjerg, m., cheyney, m., hoehn-velasco, l., jolles, d., brown, j., stapleton, j., everson, c., stapleton, s., vedam, s. (2024). Planned home births in the united states have outcomes comparable to planned birth center births for low-risk birthing individuals. Medical care, 62(12), 820-829. Https://doi.org/10.1097/mlr.0000000000002074 -- hoehn-velasco, l., ross, l., phillippi, r.d., niemczyk, n.a., cammarano, d., calvin, s., phillippi, j.c., alliman, j., stapleton, s.r., wright, j., fisch, s., jolles, d. (2024). Neonatal morbidity and mortality in birth centers in the united states 2018-2021: an observational study of low-risk birthing individuals. Birth. Https://doi.org/10.1111/birt.12823- presented -- komladzah, e. (2024, nov. 7-10). Neonatal outcomes of neworns of the gestational age range of 36 weeks to 43 weeks at freestanding birth centers [general session: research panel]. Aabc birth institute 2024, american association of birth centers, minneapolis, mn, united states. - facilitated birth centers contribution of their pdr data to the acnm benchmarking project- working actively with several associations including the american college of obstetricians and gynecologists, the society of maternal fetal medicine specialists, the american college of nurse-midwives, the midwives alliance of north american, and the national association of certified professional midwives on projects like: several areas: - meetings on maternal safety / maternal mortality - women's health registry alliance - maternity care data alliance- commented on proposed state regulations related to birth center care in Alabama, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, Oregon, and Vermont- state chapters in Arizona, California, Colorado, Minnesota, New York, pennyslvania, Texas, and Washington- worked on payment issues birth centers experiencing with tricare.- worked on advancing legislation to improve access to b

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 95.2%; rating input score 95
• Program expense ratio: 91.5%; rating input score 92
• Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

• Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Pay-setting controls: Limited
• Foreign activity oversight: Limited
• Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
• 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: 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: 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: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: -3.5%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.82; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 14.2%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: -8.2% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: -4.6% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings