Aim4india
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 273674829
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2013
- Location
- Sudan, TX, USA
- Phone
- 8067772565
- Rating
- 62
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Relief
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $231,726
- Expenses
- $233,318
- Assets
- $12,896
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEVE JOHNSON (DIRECTOR & PRESIDENT)
- JOHN HALL (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ANTHONY GODWIN SIMPSON (MINISTER): $62,500 total reported compensation
- JOHN HALL (FORMER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $25,125 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Aim4india exists exclusively for the religious, educational, and charitable purposes of engaging in and supporting indian missions.
What it reported doing in 2025
Aim4india completed its nineth academic year with 260 students. The school building has 18 classrooms and a capacity for 540 students. The water well is still working effectively. It comes complete with a commercial reverse osmosis filtration system providing clean water for the school and the surrounding village. The well was completed in june 2018, marking the first time this village has had clean drinking water available in its known history. This water is made available to anyone in the village, regardless of whether they have an affiliation with the school or not.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 64
- Transparency & Controls: 55
- Accountability: 72
- Sustainability: 27
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.6%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 66.2%; rating input score 66
- Fundraising efficiency: $11.86 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- 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: 0.06; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 37.6%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 66.6% of revenue deployed · 66.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $154K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $62K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 17 of 17 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.