American Society of Media Photographers Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 131529272
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2018–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- San Francisco, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8447623386
- Rating
- 39
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,248,183
- Expenses
- $1,379,763
- Assets
- $388,422
- Liabilities
- $248,328
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
14 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES E DATRI (CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- JAMES E DATRI (CEO): $273,220 total reported compensation
- THOMAS B MADDREY (CHIEF LEGAL OFF.): $236,351 total reported compensation
- GABRIELLA MARKS (Chairman): $22,500 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
FOUNDED IN 1944, THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MEDIA PHOTOGRAPHERS (ORIGINALLY THE SOCIETY OF MAGAZINE PHOTOGRAPHERS) IS THE LEADING TRADE ASSOCIATION FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS WHO PHOTOGRAPH PRIMARILY FOR PUBLICATION. ASMP PROMOTES PHOTOGRAPHER'S RIGHTS, EDUCATES PHOTOGRAPHERS IN BETTER BUSINESS PRACTICES, PRODUCES BUSINESS PUBLICATIONS FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS AND HELPS BUYERS FIND PROFESSIONAL PHOTOGRAPHERS. With a large contingent of nature photographers, ASMP operates programming to promote the art and science of nature photography as a medium of communication, nature appreciation, and environmental protection; provides information, education, inspiration, and opportunity for all persons interested in nature photography; and fosters excellence and ethical conduct in all aspect of our endeavors and especially encourages responsible photography in the wild. ASMP does this as a part of its broader Mission, as these practices promote the highest professional standards, thus enhancing the reputation, educa
What it reported doing in 2024
Promotes and protects the rights and interests of photographers primarily throughout the united states through educational and advocacy efforts.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 98% 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 13
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -10.5%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.64; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 38.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -62.6% per year; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.4% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -7% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 11 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $273K · 14 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: California registration: this organization is not authorized to operate as a charity in California.