Chicago Center for Vision Research

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364254746
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3124751000
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Eye Diseases, Blindness & Vision Impairments Research

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,461
Expenses
$4,143
Assets
$200,177

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • JON RUDERMAN MD (DIRECTOR)
  • LISA ROSENBERG MD (DIRECTOR)
  • JOHN YANG MD (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To promote research and study for the prevention and treatment of eye diseases, particularly glacoma.

What it reported doing in 2024

The chicago center for vision (ccvr) provides support for comprehensive post-residency fellowship education in glaucoma. This fellowship is certified by the association of university professors in ophthalmology and is administered jointly with the northwestern university feinberg school of medicine. Our fellow participated in clinical practice at university eye specialists, ltd. And at northwestern memorial hospital. He was the primary surgeon in over 600 cases. The fellow gave scientific educational presentations at local academic meetings and attended research meetings with funding obtained through ccvr. He also provided a lecture series and a national ophthalmology board review in glaucoma for the ophthalmology residents at the feinberg school of medicine, northwestern university. He is now providing subspecialty glaucoma services in houston, Texas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 81% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 18.6%; rating input score 19
  • Program expense ratio: 76%; rating input score 76

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: 87.2%; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 48.32; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 18.6% of revenue deployed · 76% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $3K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.