Auroville International USA
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237360183
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2013–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
- Location
- Sacramento, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8314255620
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Promotion of International Understanding
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,420,307
- Expenses
- $957,897
- Assets
- $761,064
- Liabilities
- $-1,170
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Matthew Andrews (President & CEO)
- Binah Thillairajah (Vice President)
Highest reported compensation
- Matthew Andrews (President & CEO): $83,678 total reported compensation
- Binah Thillairajah (Vice President): $81,810 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Auroville International USA serves projects working to support understanding and peace between diverse communities and individuals, unending education, conscious spiritual evolution, and Earth stewardship, which are the founding ideals of Auroville.
What it reported doing in 2024
During fiscal year 2025, avi USA continued to refine and structure our process for vetting and approving projects. We updated and streamlined our application form and processes, received and reviewed over 60 annual reports, and conducted site visits for dozens of projects. In all, we sent grants to 62 individual charitable projects involved with education, reafforestation, farming and food production, health and healing, women's empowerment, rural development, vocational training, and more.in addition to vetting and compliance, we also provided our partners with training and coaching in fundraising, leadership development, and organizational learning.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 80% of its reported program spending out as grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 66
- Transparency & Controls: 80
- Accountability: 73
- Sustainability: 53
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57.4%; rating input score 57
- Program expense ratio: 84.5%; rating input score 85
- Fundraising efficiency: $16.92 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
- Requires narrative reports: Fail
- Conducts field audits: Fail
- May suspend future funding: Fail
- Requires financial reports: Fail
- Conducts site visits: Pass
- Requires grant agreements: Fail
- May require repayment: Fail
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 32.6%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 17.3%; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 19.9% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 15.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 57.4% of revenue deployed · 84.5% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $810K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $84K · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2013 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 57/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 54/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 19/100.