American Society of Access Professionals Asap
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 541152815
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Jun 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Washington, DC, United States
- Phone
- 202-712-9054
- Rating
- 76
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $20,373
- Expenses
- $345,328
- Assets
- $167,260
- Liabilities
- $4,694
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ryan Patrick Mulvey (President)
- Jeremy Robert Lewis PhD (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Ryan Patrick Mulvey (President)
- Jeremy Robert Lewis PhD (Vice President)
- Marianne J Manheim (Treasurer)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To provide to the public education, information and training that enhances awareness and understanding of statutes pertaining to the availability and management of government records of information. ASAP was founded as a professional forum dedicated to bringing government FOIA and Privacy Act personnel in touch with the requester community. The requester community includes private citizens, law firms, businesses, media and nonprofit organizations; it is not a government agency. ASAP is the leading organization providing quality professional educational programs. ASAP draws upon the highest caliber of government FOIA and Privacy instructors along with known experts in the public requester field to teach and discuss common problems in an open-dialogue forum. Tremendous insight and education are attained by both sides as each learns from the perspective of the other. ASAP takes great pride.
What it reported doing in 2025
Provide methods, procedures, and techniques to access the availability of records and information in accordance with access laws and improve communication and education. In addition to serving 344 members, the organization also serves over 1,000 more individuals, primarily federal government workers, through education programs.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 80% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 16
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 44.5%; rating input score 45
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: -1,595%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.03; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.4% per year; rating input score 100; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -2.7% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 44.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $154K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $299K reported
- Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 45/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.