American Psychiatric Association Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
130433740
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025593900
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$8,231,401
Expenses
$12,680,881
Assets
$67,577,141
Liabilities
$2,135,521

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

Leadership & pay

17 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAWLE ANDREWS JR (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • SAUL LEVIN (CHAIR (UNTIL 5/24)): $674,773 total reported compensation
  • MARKETA M WILLS (CHAIR (FROM 6/24)): $471,742 total reported compensation
  • CARLTON DAVIDS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $308,002 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Promote the mental health and well-being of individuals and communities where we live, learn, work, worship, and play.

What it reported doing in 2024

Research & training - apaf fellowships provide specialized training, mentorship and leadership opportunities within the field of psychiatry for residents, post-residency research fellows and early career psychiatrists.contribute to the scientific basis of psychiatric practice, strengthen the research infrastructure in the field of psychiatry. And improve the quality of psychiatric care by conducting and supporting clinical and health services research and training activities.

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 87% 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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 84
  • Transparency & Controls: 61
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.2%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 95.4%; rating input score 95; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd 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: -54.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.33; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $10.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $675K · 17 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $2.8M reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.