Association for Psychological Science

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
731345573
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022939300
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$6,296,632
Expenses
$5,721,180
Assets
$13,772,108
Liabilities
$2,827,814

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WENDY WOOD (PRESIDENT/PAST-PRESIDENT)
  • RANDI MARTIN (PRESIDENT ELECT/PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES PENNEBAKER (PRESIDENT-ELECT (FROM 6/1/2024))
  • ALISON GOPNIK (PAST PRESIDENT (UNTIL 5/31/2024))
  • ROBERT GROPP (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT GROPP (CEO): $407,453 total reported compensation
  • AIME BALLARD-WOOD (COO): $254,342 total reported compensation
  • NATHALIE ROTHERT (SR. DIR. OF MEETINGS): $161,885 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To promote a community and national interest in scientifically oriented psychology as it pertains to research, application and improvement of human welfare.

What it reported doing in 2024

Teaching fund: twice a year, the aps teaching fund invites proposals from individuals for one-time grants of up to $15,000 to launch new projects that advance the teaching of psychological science. Proposals are reviewed by the teaching fund committee and awarded to projects that promote or advance high-quality teaching, have broad impact, meet an unmet need, are sustainable, and provide outreach opportunities. Grantees are expected to submit a report to aps upon completion of the project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 83
  • Accountability: 91
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.2%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • 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: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.1%; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.41; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 11% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.2% of revenue deployed · 87.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $407K · 20 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $463K reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.