International Society for Sexual Medicine

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
980405330
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Burnsville, MN, USA
Phone
9105454205
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Research Institutes and/or Public Policy Analysis

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,847,335
Expenses
$1,496,046
Assets
$6,832,729
Liabilities
$250,575

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Run Wang (President)
  • Gerald Brock (Past President)
  • Eric Chung (President Elect)
  • Merel Hartog (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Run Wang (President)
  • Gerald Brock (Past President)
  • Eric Chung (President Elect)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To be the most respected and trusted source of information, education and professional development on human sexual health through the delivery of world-class publications, research findings, online and in person opportunities for knowledge exchange, world-wide.

What it reported doing in 2025

ISSM undertakes various strategic initiatives to advance knowledge and leadership in sexual medicine: International Consultation on Sexual Medicine (ICSM): ISSM organizes the ICSM approximately every 5-7 years to develop authoritative guidelines and position papers in the field. In 2024, the ICSM was held in Madrid, with experts convening to review evidence and establish best practices. The resulting guidelines and position papers will be published in Sexual Medicine Reviews to support clinicians and researchers worldwide. Costs associated with the ICSM include venue expenses, travel support, organization, and social events.Collaboration with Movember: ISSM partners with Movember in a multi-year initiative to improve sexual health care for prostate cancer patients. This collaboration is designed to translate the Guidelines for Sexual Health Care for Prostate Cancer Patients into clinical practice, equipping healthcare professionals with the knowledge and tools to address the impact of prostate cancer treatments on sexual function. Through education, training, and awareness efforts, the project aims to enhance communication between clinicians and patients, fostering open discussions and setting realistic expectations for post-treatment sexual and emotional well-being.Future Leaders Program: Launched in 2024, the ISSM Future Leaders Program is dedicated to cultivating the next generation of leaders in sexual medicine. This initiative provides early-career professionals with leadership training, mentorship, and professional development opportunities. By fostering emerging talent, ISSM ensures the continued evolution and sustainability of the society, equipping future leaders with the skills and vision to advance the field of sexual medicine.Society Initiatives: ISSM allocates funding to a range of society-driven initiatives that support its mission and global activities. These include projects that have approved grants from the Zorgniotti Fund, projects and activities funded through the Global Outreach Grants, and scholarships for the ESSM School of Sexual Medicine in collaboration with ESSM. Expenditures primarily relate to award funding, educational and outreach activities (in underserved regions), and financial support for trainees and early-career professionals to participate in ISSM programs and meetings. All activities are reviewed and approved in line with ISSM governance processes, and funds are monitored to ensure they are used for their intended program purposes.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 51
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.2%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 54.7%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 19%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.57; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.2% of revenue deployed · 54.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 7 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $819K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 18 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $912K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.