American Association of Bovine Practitioners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831055129
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Ashland, OH, USA
Phone
4194960685
Rating
40
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Business and Industry

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,319,052
Expenses
$2,500,969
Assets
$1,204,338
Liabilities
$617,867

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CALLIE WILLINGHAM (PRESIDENT EL)
  • DAVID SJEKLOCHA (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • K FRED GINGRICH II DVM (EXECUTIVE DI): $215,795 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 endeavor to do all things necessary to promote the interest, to improve the public stature and increase the knowledge of veterinarians in the field of dairy and beef cattle practice; to elevate the standards of bovine practice; to attract attention to the relationship between bovine practice and the public interest; to promote understanding and goodwill among its members; to cooperate with veterinary and agricultural organizations and regulatory agencies.

What it reported doing in 2024

Membership development/benefits to attract attention to the relationship between bovine practice and the public interest and to promote understanding and good will among members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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: 66
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 19
  • 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: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -42.9% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $216K · 20 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.