ACM

Legal name: Association for Computing Machinery Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
131921358
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2128697440
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$96,182,576
Expenses
$89,747,121
Assets
$280,486,835
Liabilities
$79,527,197

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • YANNIS IOANNIDIS (PRESIDENT (NON-VOTING*))
  • ELISA BERTINO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • GABRIELE KOTSIS (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • VICKI HANSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • VICKI HANSON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $773,254 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA RYAN (CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER): $655,943 total reported compensation
  • WAYNE GRAVES (DIRECTOR-DIGITAL LIBRARY): $503,306 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

ACM is the world's largest educational and scientific computing society, uniting computing educators, researchers, and professionals to inspire dialogue, share resources, and address the field's challenges.

What it reported doing in 2024

Conferences and seminarsconferences enable the association to bring together members, community leaders and scholars to discuss current and upcoming issues in the computing field, the latest technology and groundbreaking research. These conferences, for the most part, are associated with the 37 special interest groups and are driven by the volunteers in that particular field of special interest in computing. Acm sponsors or co-sponsors over 170 of these events each year varying in size and scope from 20 to 19,000 attendees. (continued on schedule o)acm's special interest groups (sigs) sponsor more than 170 computing conferences, workshops, and symposia around the world. These events, which mirror the state-of-the-art in their respective fields, attract renowned experts from a broad range of computing disciplines. Many of these conferences have earned preeminent status in their respective fields, attracting attendees from around the globe to meet with colleagues, discover innovative trends, and address pressing issues in the digital world.these events span a host of technologies that drive the dynamic computing discipline. They include artificial intelligence, computing applications, digital content, computer science education, hardware design, interaction, networking, software, operations and management, performance, theory and more.acm sig events range in size from conferences with tens of thousands attendees to small workshops. Computing professionals submit leading-edge research papers for presentation at the conference and inclusion in the published proceedings. These refereed papers comprise the major source of research in the acm digital library, accounting for more than 425,000 articles and generating over 7.5 million citations.conferences typically incorporate invited lectures, paper and poster sessions, and panel sessions with prominent international experts and scholars. Many also feature product exhibitions, job fairs, tutorials, and student research competitions that generate networking opportunities for all attendees.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 85% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.4%; rating input score 74
  • Program expense ratio: 85.2%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • 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: 98%; rating input score 98; 34th 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; 77th 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: 6.7%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.13; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 4%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 74.4% of revenue deployed · 85.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $76.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $773K · 25 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $3.7M reported
  • Consistency: 37 of 39 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 14 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 8 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.
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 58/100.