American Society of Transplant Surgeons
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 133048373
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Arlington, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7034147870
- Rating
- 85
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Surgery Specialties
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $11,783,714
- Expenses
- $12,610,070
- Assets
- $6,353,663
- Liabilities
- $2,851,619
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
24 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ginny L BumgardnerMD PhD (President)
- James F Markmann MD PhD (President-Elect)
- Elizabeth A Promfret MD PhD (Immediate Past President)
- William C Chapman MD (Past President)
- Maggie Kebler-Bullock (Executive Director/CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Maggie Kebler-Bullock (Executive Director/CEO): $289,831 total reported compensation
- Diane Mossholder (Chief Operating Officer): $199,521 total reported compensation
- Kellie Lowery (Senior Director Finance): $145,078 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) advances the art and science of transplant surgery through patient care, research, education, and advocacy.
What it reported doing in 2024
Advocacy & Patient Care, Organizational Excellence and Research: ASTS advances the mission through the work of the Council, 27 Committees, 3 Task Forces and 2 Strike forces. The work of these groups in conjunction with the organization's strategic goals include activities such as the development of position statements, publications in peer-reviewed journals and efforts to increase diversity, equity and inclusion within the Society. The Society also commits significant resources each year to support member research and advance the field.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 60% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 44% for direct work, and 56% for grants.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 82
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 20
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 94%; rating input score 94
- Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: -7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.5; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 6%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 6.6% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 94% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $11.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $290K · 24 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 32 of 32 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 43/100.