Combat Blindness International Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
391531546
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Madison, WI, USA
Phone
6082387777
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Eye Diseases, Blindness and Vision Impairments

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,043,379
Expenses
$998,661
Assets
$792,091
Liabilities
$62,420

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • REENA CHANDRA MPH (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • REENA CHANDRA MPH (PRESIDENT/EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $63,850 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Combat blindness international, inc. (cbi) eliminates preventable blindness worldwide by providing sustainable, equitable solutions for sight through partnerships and innovation.

What it reported doing in 2025

Cataracts - cbi supports free cataract operations for the poor in india, pakistan, south america, africa, and the united states of america. Cbi also provides equipment, medical consumables, and intraocular lenses (iols) for free eye operations for the poor in areas of india. During 2025, cbi helped support over 16,000 surgeries and 700,000 screenings.for the cataract program, combat blindness international, inc. (cbi) collaborates with hospitals in india (bhubaneswar lv prasad eye hospital; shree jalaram eye hospital - meghraj, gujarat; shroff's charity eye hospital - daryaganj, new delhi; jayapriya medical foundation - hubli, karnataka; nav bharat jagriti kendra - hazaribag, jharkhand), south america (fundacion vision - paraguay), pakistan (layton rahmatulla benevolent trust - karachi), and africa (lions sightfirst eye hospital - nairobi, kenya) to provide cataract operations for the poor. Cbi collaborates in the united states of america with the university of Wisconsin hospitals and clinics and the university of Wisconsin department of opthalmology and visual sciences to provide primary and secondary level of eye care for the underinsured and uninsured residents of dane county, Wisconsin.

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 89% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 73
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.6%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th 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: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.4%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.6% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $783K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 38 of 39 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.