American Osteopathic Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
366056120
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3122028200
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,787,843
Expenses
$2,856,296
Assets
$24,824,332
Liabilities
$450,309

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

Leadership & pay

23 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JOSEPH ZAMMUTO DO (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • SCOTT CYRUS DO (PRESIDENT)
  • DAWN TARTAGLIONE DO (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JULIEANNE SEES DO (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • JOHN KOWALCZYK DO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RITA FORDEN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • RITA FORDEN (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $341,104 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD BLAIR (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER, CO-TREASURER): $191,276 total reported compensation
  • TERESA SANDERS (DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR): $145,916 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the american osteopathic foundation is to support programs and services that promote osteopathic medicine and enhance patient-centered care.

What it reported doing in 2025

International humanitarian outreach: the aof provides grants to help defray international travel costs for members of the osteopathic profession who provide medical support to underserved, underdeveloped and/or disaster-stricken areas across the world. This grant program brings medical attention to tens of thousands of patients who may have otherwise gone without care. An expansion of the international humanitarian outreach program includes grants to domestic organizations run by an osteopathic physician(s) that treat patients throughout the year in a foreign country(s). Originally incorporated into aof's portfolio to provide medical aid following the pandemic, multi-year international grants are now part of the overall program.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 85
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.5%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 48.6%; rating input score 49
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.79 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.1%; rating input score 99; 43rd 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: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.5%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.69; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 27.9%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.5% of revenue deployed · 48.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $341K · 23 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 38 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 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: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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: Program expense ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 10/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.