American Environmental Health Studies Pr

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
621599535
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Essex Junction, VT, USA
Phone
7575251107
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Quality, Protection, and Beautification N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$360,765
Expenses
$332,144
Assets
$291,822
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DAWNA GALLAGHER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STUART COOPER - NON-VOTING (DIRECTOR): $75,000 total reported compensation
  • CHRISTOPHER NEURATH - NON-VOTING (DIRECTOR): $17,000 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 facilitate projects that empower citizens and educate decision makers on issues that have the potential to harm human health or the environment, and offer alternative solutions which are environmentally just and sustainable.

What it reported doing in 2025

See schedule oduring 2025, the fluoride action network (fan) continued updating citizens and lawmakers on the many scientific studies publishe weekly on fluoride's adverse effects on health. 1)fan shares the scientific studies and reports on fluoride daily on our website2)fan shares local, national, and international news reports on fluoride daily on our website.3)fan continues to respond to requests and interviews from lawmakers and news organizations.4)due to increased number of communities ending fluoridation, fan has received many requests to speak at various meetings.5)fan has been active in responding to appeals of the tsca trial ruling (sept 2024)6)fan publishes a monthly fluoridation review by michael dolan

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.7%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 92%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $22.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.9%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.88; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.7% of revenue deployed · 92% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $306K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $75K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 6 filed money-flow records
  • 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: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 58/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.