Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203310936
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2023445674
Rating
73
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Personal Social Services

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$936,217
Expenses
$991,646
Assets
$608,028
Liabilities
$252,019

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JEANIE KRULL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • AUDREY BUSCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • RICK ANDERSON (President)
  • TOBIAS ORR (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • JEANIE KRULL (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $95,833 total reported compensation
  • AUDREY BUSCH (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $58,590 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 association of assistive technology act programs (atap) will set the national direction and advocate for at act programs. Atap will promote and support quality performance of the state of at programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

To maintain and enhance a strong, effective, and efficient national network of Statewide Assistive Technology Programs, which enables individuals with disabilities, service providers and others to learn about, access, and acquire assistive technology (AT) needed for education, employment, and community living.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 63% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.8%; rating input score 99
  • Program expense ratio: 93.3%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.9%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.61; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.41; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.6%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.6% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.3% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.8% of revenue deployed · 93.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $925K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $96K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.