American Chemical Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510193197
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Columbia, MO, USA
Phone
5734436134
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chemistry, Chemical Engineering

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$113,152
Expenses
$215,729
Assets
$565,115
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Aaron Gross (Past Chair)
  • James Foster (Chair)
  • Mingming Ma (Program Chair)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Dissemination of scientific information relating to chemistry for and/or from agriculture

What it reported doing in 2024

Scientific programming at the Fall 2024 American Chemical Society Meetings. Grants total includes travel grants to students to present research at the Fall 2024 Division of Agrochemicals Student Research Symposium. Expenses include awards and reimbursements associated with the 2024 meeting paid out in 2024, plus one award related to the Fall 2023 meeting but not paid out until 2024. Expenses also include payments for Fall 2023 Meeting made early in 2024, plus payment for Fall 2024 Meeting, made toward the end of 2024. Revenue is the allocation from ACS National for the Fall 2023 Meeting, plus reimbursements for Councilor 2024 meeting expenses paid out for 2024. Also includes Officer travel reimbursements and contractor planning charges.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 54
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 97.8%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 34.5%; rating input score 35; 40th 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -90.7%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.62; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -4.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 97.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 9 filed program accomplishments · $211K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 20 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 35/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.