American College of Medical Toxicology Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
870460513
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6235336340
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$5,837,365
Expenses
$4,725,901
Assets
$6,312,286
Liabilities
$991,875

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ZIAD KAZZI MD (PRESIDENT)
  • ANDREW STOLBACH MD (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • PAUL WAX (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL WAX (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $517,581 total reported compensation
  • RACHEL E CULBRETH (RESEARCH DIRECTOR): $128,220 total reported compensation
  • SHARAN L CAMPLEMAN (RESEARCH SCIENTIST): $127,200 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Advance the science, education and practice of medical toxicology by fostering the development of medical toxicology in its provision of emergency, consultation, forensic, legal, community, and industrial services.

What it reported doing in 2024

Pediatric environmental health specialty units (pehsu) - cooperative agreement with the agency for toxic substances and disease registry (atsdr) to maintain an interconnected system of specialists located throughout north america. Support is passed through to five regional sites within the western united states that respond to questions from public health professionals, clinicians, policy makers, and the public about the impacts of environmental factors on the health of children and reproductive-age adults.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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 total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 65
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 92
  • Sustainability: 57
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.2%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 71.8%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $48.45 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 24th 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.34; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.16; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16.4%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.7% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 15.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.2% of revenue deployed · 71.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $518K · 18 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $770K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 49/100.