Chemists Without Borders

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
141984379
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Cloverdale, CA, USA
Phone
6102123770
Rating
56
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chemistry, Chemical Engineering

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,727
Expenses
$10,801
Assets
$10,545
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • RAMIN SEDEHI (PRESIDENT &)

People named in this filing

  • ACHAL GARG (CHAIRPERSON)
  • RONDA L GROSSE (DIRECTOR)
  • ROLANDE R HODEL (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Using science to improve the quality of life in communities most in need through service, science education, innovation, and community empowerment by uniting scientists globally to advance humanitarian...

What it reported doing in 2025

In partnership with the himalayan tribal community development in nepal (htcdn), cwb has been engaged in developing programming in the following areas (all programs are in-development stage. The numbers cited are at full program maturation): a. Adult education and lifelong learning (50-100 people annually) o development of adult literacy and foundational learning programs o practical science education relevant to daily life o community learning workshops focused on health, sanitation, nutrition, and environmental awareness o strengthening local capacity for peer-to-peer teaching and learning b. Science-based quality-of-life interventions (4-5 schools impacting hundreds of students annually) o community education on safe water practices and hygiene o environmental health awareness and sustainability education o practical, locally adaptable approaches to improving household and community well-being c. Capacity building and knowledge exchange (5 villages and associated communities annually) o training and support for local educators and facilitators o exchange of knowledge, ideas, and culturally appropriate educational resources o collaborative development of community-centered learning models d. Livelihood and skills development (100-200 families annually) o science-informed approaches to strengthening local livelihoods o practical skills training that supports economic resilience o support for community initiatives that enhance self-reliance e. Volunteer and student engagement (4-5 schools annually) o opportunities for responsible volunteer participation o support for student-led service learning initiatives o cultural and knowledge exchange that respects local leadership and priorities

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

MIXED - 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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 19
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 51
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 21.4%; rating input score 21
  • Program expense ratio: 23.2%; rating input score 23
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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; 64th 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: 7.9%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.98; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9.9% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.3% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 21.4% of revenue deployed · 23.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • 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 21/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.