Pennsylvania Academy of Ophthalmology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
232611653
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Harrisburg, PA, USA
Phone
7178298412
Rating
48
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$214,162
Expenses
$215,555
Assets
$1,160,920
Liabilities
$55,560

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DONALD MORRIS DO (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFFREY D HENDERER MD (PRESIDENT-EL)

People named in this filing

  • DONALD MORRIS DO (PRESIDENT)
  • JEFFREY D HENDERER MD (PRESIDENT-EL)
  • SCOTT M GOLDSTEIN MD (PAC CHAIR/AA)

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

Pennsylvania academy of ophthalmology was incorporated as a nonprofit organization in september 1990. The academy's purpose is to act as the voice of ophthalmologic medicine in Pennsylvania; to foster among its members the provision of their talents, knowledge, and skill or the benefit of the public; to serve as a patient advocate in promoting preventive eye care; and to advance the knowledge, science, and practice of ophthalmology.

What it reported doing in 2025

The pao fulfills its mission by providing education for doctors and their staff, by advocating for ophthalmologists and their patients in the state legislature, and promoting preventative eye care to the citizens of Pennsylvania. Activities that support this mission include: 1) pao, with the help of their government relations firm, provided input to state legislators promoting school age children in Pennsylvania with low- cost vision screenings as opposed to costly eye exams each year. This legislation was enacted in 2020 but has been reintroduced and continues to be of concern. Pao sponsored the diabetic eye screening day across pa on april 26, 2025. Ophthalmologists from across the state were available for free screening and follow up care. Legislators included announcements in their community newsletter and also declared by resolution that april 26 was diabetic eye screening day. 2)pao's young ophthalmologists committees sponsored the popular webinars for early career ophthalmologists that were open to full membership on "top 10 things i learned about billing & coding my first year- and "navigating challenging patient encounters" the "yo"s also held the 3rd annual pao state-wide virtual grand rounds competition. This year they grew the participation in the networking events for residents and early- career ophthalmologists held in the fall. 3)the program for early career ophthalmologists called "the business of ophthalmology" included three live webinars on topics not covered by formal medical education: practice management, advocacy 101, and personal finance. The series was endorsed by the national organization and the recordings are shared at residency programs across the state. 4)pao sponsored several educational webinars for continuing medical education (cme) credits free to our members: "2025 annual symposium: new treatments in 2025" "eye pain - the neuro-ophthalmology perspective," "top10 things in ai & tech to improve clinical efficiency- and "omic- lessons learned glaucoma claims" " live webinars provided 8 hours of cme. Our virtual medical coding seminar was attended by more than 70 attendees. 5)the pao published two print newsletters in 2025 and published 2 digital newsletters as well as over 28 informational e-blasts to the membership on topics of state advocacy, updates in pa provider changes, medical license renewals, ophthalmic state and national events outside of pao.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 89% 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

MIXED - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 93
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.7%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.39; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -34.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.9% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 19 of 19 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 20 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $164K reported
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.