US Apple Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 530210482
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- McLean, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7034428850
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,325,466
- Expenses
- $2,476,564
- Assets
- $3,501,284
- Liabilities
- $1,150,373
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
30 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- James A Bair (President & CEO)
- Diane C Kurrle (Senior Vice President)
- Christopher S Gerlach (Vice President, Insights & Analytics)
- Jessica L Allen (Vice President, Membership & Events)
Highest reported compensation
- James A Bair (President & CEO): $454,665 total reported compensation
- Diane C Kurrle (Senior Vice President): $205,344 total reported compensation
- Christopher S Gerlach (Vice President, Insights & Analytics): $187,252 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Our mission is to advocate for American apple growers and their industry partners to promote the profitable production and marketing of apples and apple products.
What it reported doing in 2024
TreeTAC: Formed in 2001 by the Association and the Northwest Horticultural Council (NHC), the Tree-Fruit Technical Advisory Council (TreeTAC) is a coalition designed to safeguard the U.S. tree fruit industry from pest and disease threats. While the Association and NHC continue to maintain TreeTAC's organizational structure to address future technical or quarantine emergencies, active committee operations were reduced due to a decreased immediate need for technical intervention. Consequently, the Association remitted the majority of the designated TreeTAC funds back to the contributing organizations, retaining a small reserve for future contingencies as mutually determined by the Presidents of USApple and NHC.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 96% 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: 94
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -6.5%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.41; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 47.7%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $455K · 30 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $280K reported
- Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 18/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.