ASHP Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237033369
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Baltimore, MD, United States
Phone
301-664-8612
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Religion Related N.E.C.
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,585,475
Expenses
$3,245,282
Assets
$14,275,101
Liabilities
$673,342

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KELLY MCCORMICK-SULLIVAN (SECRETARY AND CEO)
  • PAUL W ABRAMOWITZ (PRESIDENT)
  • NISHAMINY KASBEKAR (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT OF ASHP)
  • LEIGH BRISCOE-DWYER (PRESIDENT OF ASHP)
  • STEVEN A RUBLOFF (SECRETARY AND CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • PAUL W ABRAMOWITZ (PRESIDENT): $1,231,032 total reported compensation
  • STEVEN A RUBLOFF (SECRETARY AND CEO): $289,219 total reported compensation
  • BARBARA NUSSBAUM (VP, RESEARCH AND EDUCATION): $263,461 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Improving Patient Outcomes Through Safe and Effective Medication Use. Our impact reports are designed to share achievements with our sponsors, donors, and program participants. The ASHP Foundation works to advance pharmacy practice and improve patient outcomes by supporting programs that enhance pharmacists’ patient care skills, validating the important role that pharmacists play in the healthcare system, investing in future leaders and recognizing excellence in research and practice. We hope you will be inspired to continue to support our mission. About Us Mission and Vision.

What it reported doing in 2024

Excellence in pharmacy practice and leadership development: recognize and promote efforts that foster excellence and growth of health-system pharmacy. Ashp student leadership award: this program, funded through the david a. Zilz fund, is administered by the ashp pharmacy student forum in collaboration with the ashp foundation. Twelve students who demonstrated high academic achievement, exceptional interest in health-system pharmacy practice, and outstanding leadership skills were recognized. The awardees received a plaque, a $2,000 award and an ashp drug information library. Each awardee submitted a plan to raise student awareness of the ashp practice advancement initiative. Awardees will be surveyed to collect information on the implementation and outcomes of their plan.pharmacy residency excellence awards program: samson medical technologies and medi-dose supported the 2024 pharmacy residency excellence awards program. This unique award recognizes excellence and leadership in the training and mentoring of pharmacy residents. The pharmacy residency excellence awards program recognizes a preceptor, new preceptor and program. The objectives of this program are to: 1) recognize the achievements of residency programs and pharmacists who have demonstrated excellence and leadership in the training of pharmacy residents and 2) widely disseminate the results of these accomplishments to foster innovations in pharmacy resident training. Awardees receive a plaque and participate in short interviews and are recognized through various electronic platforms and at the ashp midyear clinical meeting and exhibition (ashp midyear). Each awardee will also present an educational webinar on resident professional development topics. The webinars are recorded and made available for on-demand access. Literature awards program: the ashp foundation literature awards program recognizes important contributions to biomedical literature by pharmacists. This program, administered by the ashp foundation since 1971, recognizes to stimulate innovation and fosters improvement in the quality of the evidence. Awardees were recognized in five (5) different categories in 2024. Awardees receive an honorarium, plaque, participate in short interviews and podcasts, and are recognized through various electronic platforms and at the ashp midyear meeting. Midyear travel award: the midyear travel award, originally created as a collaboration between the ashp foundation and #pharmgradwishlist, awarded 32 pharmd candidates with a $500 travel stipend, registration to the ashp midyear meeting, and a one-year ashp membership. There were 260 applications received for the award in fy25. The program was partially funded via $25,000 donations each from marvin samson and apexus, along with individual donations. Ashp foundation pharmacy student scholarship: in fy25, the ashp foundation engaged with selected recipients of the pharmacy student scholarship. The scholarship was awarded in spring 2025 (fy24) through four us-accredited historically black colleges and universities (hbcus) schools of pharmacy for the 2024-2025 academic year. No scholarships were awarded through this program in fy25. Pharmacist nutrition support patient-care impact program: supported by an educational grant from baxter and offered in collaboration with ashp's section on clinical specialists and scientists, the pharmacist nutrition support patient-care impact program distance program is designed to develop leaders with knowledge and skills to optimize safe and effective nutritional support needs of patients. A cohort of eight pharmacy residents in pgy2 programs were selected to complete the program with their preceptor. The previous cohort completed the experiential portion of the program throughout fy25. The application for a new cycle opened in fy25, with the cohort selected in fy26. Medication safety scholars: ashp foundation in partnership with emily jerry foundation and the ashp student forum selected part

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 61
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 67.1%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 64.8%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $2.21 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th 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: 9.5%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.4; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 36.6%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -5.6% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.5% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 67.1% of revenue deployed · 64.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 15 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $2.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.2M · 19 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $117K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 20 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 17 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 6/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.