American Hotel & Lodging Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
130432130
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
(202) 289-3100
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,482,786
Expenses
$32,375,699
Assets
$34,532,024
Liabilities
$14,618,941

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

Leadership & pay

98 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WILLIAM ROGERS (PRES. & CEO (UNTIL 3/24))
  • KEVIN CAREY (INTERIM PRES. & CEO (3/24-11/24))
  • ROSANNA MAIETTA (PRES. & CEO (FROM 11/24))

Highest reported compensation

  • WILLIAM ROGERS (PRES. & CEO (UNTIL 3/24)): $1,221,254 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN CAREY (INTERIM PRES. & CEO (3/24-11/24)): $1,014,388 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL FLANAGAN (EVP, EXTERNAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS AND INDUSTRY RELA): $582,743 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To unify the hotel industry and provide advocacy, connectivity, and resources to its members.

What it reported doing in 2024

Government affairs: the american hotel & lodging association (ahla) is comitted to promoting innovative policy solutions that elevate the domestic lodging industry and the millions of jobs it supports. Ahla's advocacy agenda includes supporting and promoting our workforce, protecting our guests and the guest experience, ensuring a level playing field with alternative accommodations platforms that impact neighborhoods and affordable housing, highlighting our industries commitment to sustainable practices and promoting travel and tourism. Ahla works in a bipartisan, bicameral manner to advocate for policies so that our industry, our employees and the communities across the country where we operate continue to thrive.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 88% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 19
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 52.1%; rating input score 52; 12th 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; 66th 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: -17.8%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.07; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.42; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.8%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.5% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 89 of 89 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 98 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
  • Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 83 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 16 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 38/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.