Professional Association for Adhd Coaches Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
270465036
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Denver, PA, USA
Phone
7174842077
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$39,200
Expenses
$27,523
Assets
$35,111
Liabilities
$643

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Catherine Bray (President/Marketing Co-Chair)
  • Liz Brown (Vice-President/Credentialing Co-Chair)

People named in this filing

  • Catherine Bray (President/Marketing Co-Chair)
  • Liz Brown (Vice-President/Credentialing Co-Chair)
  • Rhea Finch (Secretary Outgoing)

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

PAAC's mission is to establish high standards of excellence in ADHD certification and accreditation programs. We advocate for coaches and the profession of ADHD coaching, for the benefit of all individuals in need.

What it reported doing in 2025

During 2025, PAAC continued to grow its Members to Members Program, which allows the member to share knowledge with other members, growing as a member of the PAAC community. PAAC attended the International Conference on ADHD in Kansas City, MO in November 2025. We used this opportunity to present our credentialing programs. This conference also allowed the Board members to further their education by attending the multitude of educational breakout sessions made available to those in attendance.

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 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

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 56
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.8%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 68%; rating input score 68

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.8%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.9% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 36.4% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.8% of revenue deployed · 68% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $19K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.