American Council of the Blind Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 580914436
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2025
- Location
- Alexandria, VA, USA
- Phone
- 6123323242
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Eye Diseases, Blindness and Vision Impairments
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,940,926
- Expenses
- $2,392,773
- Assets
- $7,577,651
- Liabilities
- $2,453,645
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DEB COOK LEWIS (PRESIDENT)
- DAVID TROTT (1ST VICE PRESIDENT)
- KENNETH SEMIEN SR (2ND VICE PRESIDENT)
- KIM CHARLSON (PAST PRESIDENT)
- TIMOTHY SCOTT THORNHILL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- TIMOTHY SCOTT THORNHILL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $162,242 total reported compensation
- NANCY MARKS BECKER (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $148,027 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To increase the independence, security, equality of opportunity, and quality of life for all blind and visually impaired people.
What it reported doing in 2025
Public awareness attended and presented at numerous technology, advocacy, and disability-related conferences promoting acb's work and services. The fifth annual acb audio description awards gala was broadcast live on youtube and peacock, extending acb's reach across the nation. Acb media's 10 internet streams had over 154,400 listening hours. Acb's social media presence resulted in over 34,300 followers across seven platforms with consistent engagement on daily posts. Acb's website and the audio description project website allow acb to keep the public aware of ongoing activities, current initiatives, and news important to people who are blind, low vision, or who are connected to someone in the community.audio description project (adp)acb's audio description project sponsors a broad range of activities designed to build awareness of audio description. At the 2025 audio description awards gala, the awards for best audio description writer and narrator were given for the first time. The adp celebrated the media industry's advancement of audio description; served on the fcc's disability advisory committee; sponsored its annual essay contest for students; conducted sessions of the audio description training institute; and participated in the unidescription project's effort to create audio description for national park service brochures. The adp also launched a new website, formed a video gaming subcommittee, and held a live kickoff for the ad people's choice award.acb scholarships and awardsin 2025, acb in collaboration with afb distributed $116,200 in scholarship funding to 21 blind students pursuing post-secondary education. Many scholarship recipients participated in the annual convention, providing opportunities to build connections with peers who share similar experiences. Additionally, seven emerging leaders were selected as jpmorgan chase leadership fellows and dkm first-timer award recipients, receiving support through mentoring, training, and peer engagement. These individuals also attended acb's convention, where they strengthened their leadership skills and expanded their professional networks.information and peer supportacb offers essential information and referral services for individuals and families experiencing vision loss, connecting them with resources such as accessible technology, daily living skills, and advocacy support. Many callers simply want someone to talk to about adjusting to vision loss. To meet this need, acb has created a virtual peer support community platform.
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 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74.2%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: $6.16 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 75th 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: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.6%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.17; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.32; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 12.4%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.7% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 74.2% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $162K · 21 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 27/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.