Entertainment Software Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
133768378
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2022232400
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,733,857
Expenses
$35,510,258
Assets
$59,313,598
Liabilities
$20,556,255

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • STANLEY PIERRE-LOUIS (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • PATRICIA VANCE (PRESIDENT - ESRB)

Highest reported compensation

  • STANLEY PIERRE-LOUIS (PRESIDENT & CEO): $1,773,639 total reported compensation
  • PATRICIA VANCE (PRESIDENT - ESRB): $1,199,350 total reported compensation
  • GINA VETERE (SVP & GENERAL COUNSEL (TO JAN '25)): $822,597 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 ESA team and our member companies engage with policymakers and regulators to advocate for laws and regulations that help the industry create, distribute and protect the games we all know and love to play – and the ones we have yet to imagine.

What it reported doing in 2024

Legal, legislative, and public affairs - advocates for the first amendment and commercial interests of the video game industry before state and federal policymakers and the courts. Serves as the sole public relations interface between the video game industry and the media to inform the public of the civic, economic, technical, educational, and entertainment value of the video game industry.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 93% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • 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: 97.5%; rating input score 98; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th 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: 12.8%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.67; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.35; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.3%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.1% per year; rating input score 100; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.8M · 24 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 299 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.