Akhand Jyoti USA
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 825424339
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- Sunnyvale, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4086855504
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Health Support Services
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $212,812
- Expenses
- $55,593
- Assets
- $176,130
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ASHOK DESAI (PRESIDENT)
- PREENA SONI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- ASHOK DESAI (PRESIDENT)
- KRISHNA JHAVERI (SCY & CFO)
- PREENA SONI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Eradicate cureable blindness, girls education, and women empowerment in the rural india
What it reported doing in 2024
Eye care providers in developing countries face significant challenges in delivering services to all who need them. Hospitals are often inaccessible to remote communities, and while eye camps are useful, they typically see low attendance. Akhand jyoti USA supports akhand jyoti eye hospital to address these barriers by establishing vision centers (vc) to serve rural, marginalized communities with accessible and affordable eye care. Over 80% of patients at these centers are fully treated on-site, with less than 20% referred to base hospitals for surgeries or advanced care. Since launching its first vision center in 2009, akhand jyoti has established over 40 centers, covering a population of nearly four million across bihar. These centers are integral to akhand jyoti's 'football to eyeball' girls' education program, empowering women as optometrists and entrepreneurs. Female-led vision centers challenge patriarchal norms while ensuring high-quality eye care in underserved areas.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 98% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 43
- Transparency & Controls: 85
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 84
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 23.5%; rating input score 23
- Program expense ratio: 89.9%; rating input score 90
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Pass
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Pass
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 73.9%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.17; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 23.5% of revenue deployed · 89.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $50K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
- Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
- 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 23/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.