Association of the United States Army

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
530193361
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Arlington, VA, USA
Phone
7038414300
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,896,685
Expenses
$35,852,261
Assets
$161,386,147
Liabilities
$33,545,606

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

Leadership & pay

30 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT B BROWN (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROBERT B BROWN (PRESIDENT & CEO): $856,835 total reported compensation
  • LESLIE SMITH (VP, LEADERSHIP & EDUCATION): $542,788 total reported compensation
  • DANIEL DAILEY (VP, NCO): $538,792 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 the united states army (ausa) supports soldiers, their families and army civilians, provides a voice for the army, and honors those who have served. As the army's premier nonprofit, educational and professional association, we: -educate those we serve (soldiers and their families, army civilians, retired soldiers and veterans, and the businesses and industries that support the army) with programs, products, resources, and events,-inform our members, congress, and the american public about issues affecting america's army - regular army, army national guard, and army reserve, and-connect america's total army, its industry partners, like-minded associations, and other supporters at the national, regional, and chapter levels.

What it reported doing in 2024

Education and programs: ausa's education & programs (edu&p) is charged with informing and educating our membership; local, regional and national leaders; and the american public on the critical nature of land warfare and the importance of the united states army. In carrying out its mission, the department manages an educational program of professional publications, events and a podcast that are designed to focus the defense debate on issues of importance to the nation's security and on the vital role of the army. Ausa's edu&p publications list: the harding papersas a part of the harding project - the effort to revitalize scholarship and writing across the army - ausa has partnered with army university press to host the ltg (ret) james m. Dubik writing fellows program - a voluntary, non-resident writing fellowship to encourage discourse that contributes to a community of military and national security professionals. The harding papers series exclusively publishes the work and scholarship of the dubik writing fellows. Land warfare papersseries designed to provide an outlet for original, in-depth research essays. These monographs on key defense issues are written by defense subject matter experts and are screened and developed for publication by ausa's editorial board. Landpower essaysseries for original, opinion-style essays on timely defense topics. While the land warfare papers are heavily focused on research and are more academic in tone, the landpower essays are generally shorter and encourage a more conversational and reflective approach. They are published in coordination with ausa events to provide topical materials to further promote discussion, education and engagement.spotlights highlight key issues, often technical in nature, that are relevant to the army and its role in national defense. Spotlights are distributed to military and civilian leadership, selected segments of the american public, members of congress, key congressional staff, industry and the administration.profile of the u.s. Army: a reference handbook a user-friendly reference book for people familiar with the army and an easy-to-read introduction for family members, civilian employees, industry partners and future soldiers. Published every two years, it describes the army's role as a key element in the national security structure as well as the army's organization, ongoing operations worldwide, and the mission and activities of every army command, army service component command and direct reporting unit. Special reports occasional publications that fall outside of our regular series. Whether they are short papers, mid-size pamphlets, or longer handbooks, they aim to inform constituents and to increase professional and sometimes familial development for soldiers and all those who serve in the defense community. Ausa's edu&p programs list: contemporary military forums hosted during ausa's annual meeting, global force symposium, lanpac symposium, landeuro symposium and other symposia throughout the year. These forums cover topics of current interest to army professionals and ausa members, such as readiness, modernization and reform. Ausa's senior executive roundtable series brings together knowledgeable senior leadership from both the army and industry for small-group, in-depth discussions on army capabilities and requirements in key mission areas. The roundtable generates feedback for the army and creates informed advocates who can articulate the army's future concepts and needs to the wide variety of audiences who contribute to these vital mission sets. There are seven sert topics (e.g., army sustainment, army infrastructure, army air & missile defense); each sert assembles two to three times per year, is limited to 24 participants and is conducted with no audience, no press and no official minutes or recording. Noon report webinar seriesausa's noon report webinar series features presentations by senior army leaders responsible for key programs and initi

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 81% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 82% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 76
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 73.2%; rating input score 73
  • Program expense ratio: 86%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $54.52 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 31st 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 73.4%; rating input score 73; 15th 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; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.6%; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.5; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.21; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 73.2% of revenue deployed · 86% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 7 filed program accomplishments · $30.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $857K · 30 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $6.8M reported
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 30 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 10 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.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.