The American Society for Cell Biology

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
396054285
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Rockville, MD, USA
Phone
3013479300
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,068,106
Expenses
$6,614,974
Assets
$15,066,655
Liabilities
$4,425,737

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

Leadership & pay

25 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SANDRA MURRAY (PRESIDENT)
  • MARY MUNSON (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • ERIKA HOLZBAUR (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • REBECCA ALVANIA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

Highest reported compensation

  • REBECCA ALVANIA (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $394,422 total reported compensation
  • HABEN KUBROM (VP, FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION): $295,207 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN WILSON (VP, POLICY, GOVERNANCE & MEETINGS): $233,312 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To lead a diverse, global and multidisciplinary scientific community focused on the cell, the basic unit of all life.

What it reported doing in 2024

Workforce development: ascb has current government-funded grants and one foundation-funded grant that include support for broadening participation in the biomedical workforce.nih programs: innovative programs to enhance research training (ipert) concluded in february 2024 - this program seeks to support creative and innovative research educational activities to enhance the diversity of the biomedical workforce and support career development and transition (continued on schedule o). The program is for scientists underrepresented in biomedical science. This program provides skills development training and provides mentorship to help participants overcome challenges to successful career transition. The program focuses on the successful transition from postdoctoral to faculty and faculty to full-tenured faculty. Maximizing opportunities for scientific and academic independent careers (mosaic) - this program seeks to broaden participation within the academic biomedical workforce to facilitate the transition from postdoctoral researchers to research-intensive faculty. The program is for scientists underrepresented in biomedical science. The program develops cohorts, provides career and science mentorship, enhances scientific and professional networks, and provides career and professional development skills. Nsf programs: faculty research and education development (fred) program - this program is designed to promote grant funding success for senior postdoctoral and junior faculty from backgrounds underrepresented in stem. The program also serves postdoctoral and junior faculty at minority-serving institutions. Rcn leaps - leveraging, enhancing, and developing biology (led-bio) scientific societies shedding light on persistent cultural challenges- this program seeks to create and leverage an expanded network of a community of practices across disciplines. The program will collaboratively identify evidence-based strategies that address cultural challenges found in scientific societies. Foundation-funded program: partnering to advance imaging research for underrepresented scientists program - this program offers imaging workshops; research funds for novel, collaborative research projects using advanced imaging techniques; and professional development workshops.

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 98% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 70
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 50
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.6%; rating input score 67
  • Program expense ratio: 66%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5,382.23 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.9%; rating input score 99; 36th 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; 63rd 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: 6.4%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.28; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.29; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.6%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.2% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.6% of revenue deployed · 66% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 8 filed program accomplishments · $4.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $394K · 25 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $798K reported
  • Consistency: 38 of 38 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 54/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 35/100.