American College of Mohs Surgery Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
362902642
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2022
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4143471103
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,266,953
Expenses
$2,780,429
Assets
$9,424,318
Liabilities
$1,431,193

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRENT R MOODY MD FACMS (PRESIDENT)
  • JERRY D BREWER MD MS FACMS (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRENT R MOODY MD FACMS (PRESIDENT)
  • JERRY D BREWER MD MS FACMS (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • CHRISTOPHER J MILLER MD FACMS (SECRETARY/TREASURER)

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

The college promotes and advances the highest standards of patient care with respect to mohs surgery and cutaneous oncology through fellowship training, research, education and public advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2024

The annual meeting brings together over 1000 participants to educate them on the latest advances in the treatment of skin cancer, discuss recent research findings in the area of mohs micrographic surgery and cutaneous oncology, and explain new techniques in reconstruction. Participants are able to attend various educational sessions, research abstract presentations and listen to guest speakers. Continuing medical education credits are also available for qualifying participants

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 94% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.2%; rating input score 61
  • Program expense ratio: 69.8%; rating input score 70
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.25 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 84.6%; rating input score 85; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 78.5%; rating input score 78; 21st 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 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.9%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.39; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.15; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.2% of revenue deployed · 69.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 15 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 filed related-organization links
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 1/100.
  • 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 — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.