Association of Chief Academic Officers Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 464854939
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2018, Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA
- Phone
- 9545407491
- Rating
- 87
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $71,068
- Expenses
- $82,642
- Assets
- $234,780
- Liabilities
- $26,684
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
18 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- GAIL F BAKER (PAST-PRESIDENT)
- PAM STINSON (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
- MICHAEL CARR (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- GAIL F BAKER (PAST-PRESIDENT)
- PAM STINSON (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
- MARK R GINSBERG (SECRETARY)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To professionalize the chief academic officers role, provide a network of support for its members, create a forum for national and international deliberations on higher education issues and contribute to its preparation.
What it reported doing in 2025
Acao will work to enhance the effectiveness of caos by providing networking & professionaldevelopment opportunities & engaging members in conversations focused on issues that cut across the diversity of higher education institutions & missions.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- 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
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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 41
- Growth: 40
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -16.3%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.84; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -18.7% per year; rating input score 0; 16th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -5.9% per year; rating input score 0; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $83K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 24/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.