American Genetic Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
530204656
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
South Beach, OR, USA
Phone
3017884365
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$413,876
Expenses
$299,289
Assets
$5,147,766
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHAEL NACHMAN (PRESIDENT)
  • ANNE BRONIKOWSKI (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JEFF GOOD (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARLOS DRISCOLL (MANAGING EDITOR): $117,266 total reported compensation
  • WILLIAM MURPHY (EDITOR): $15,000 total reported compensation
  • BRADLEY SHAFFER (TREASURER): $1,000 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 encourage the study of comparative genetics and genomics, in order to document, conserve, and manage organismal diversity.

What it reported doing in 2025

Publish bi-monthly journal reporting on genetic research and widely used in the teaching of university level genetic studies. Annual meeting and conferences provide forum for discussion of current developments in genetic research. Grants are awarded to support graduate student research projects and workshops to train students.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 57% for direct work, and 43% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 72
  • Accountability: 48
  • Sustainability: 74
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 40.6%; rating input score 41
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Pass
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.1%; rating input score 98; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 11
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 27.7%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.2; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 40.6% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 16 board members independent · 1 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $260K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $117K · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 16 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 41/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.