Western Association of Advisors for Health Professions

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
954160217
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2021–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2015
Location
Medical Lake, WA, USA
Phone
5098692535
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$158,335
Expenses
$56,470
Assets
$402,935
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CHARLES SCRUGGS (PRESIDENT)
  • JANE BYRNES (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTI WEDDIGE (PRESIDENT ELECT)

People named in this filing

  • CHARLES SCRUGGS (PRESIDENT)
  • JANE BYRNES (PAST PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTI WEDDIGE (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Waahp is part of the national association of advisors for the health professions (naahp) and gives members access to pre-health advisors, admissions deans, and professional schools and associations across the nation. Naahp and waahp collaborate with an advisory council of professional organizations, including the national organizations for medicine, dentistry, optometry, pharmacy, physical therapy, and many more.

What it reported doing in 2024

Health professions conference

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 the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 90
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 24.6%; rating input score 25
  • Program expense ratio: 70.7%; rating input score 71

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 64.3%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.14; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 41.2% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 24.6% of revenue deployed · 70.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $40K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2021 to 2024
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 25/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.