Eye Care Professional Education Inc Woo University
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 871917945
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2021
- Location
- Las Vegas, NV, USA
- Phone
- 5203702959
- Rating
- 72
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,127,643
- Expenses
- $1,136,635
- Assets
- $120,174
- Liabilities
- $23,100
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- STEHANIE L WOO (PRESIDENT)
- JENNA CZARMECKY (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- STEHANIE L WOO (PRESIDENT): $93,240 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Eye care professional education, inc is a 501-c3 non profit organization committed to provided high quality education to eye care practitioners, residents, and students all over the world. Many students and physicians are unable to travel for education, which is why our organization develops high quality virtual events. Our events are mostly virtual, which enables eye care professionals from anywhere to access highly requested topics presented by experts in the eye care field.
What it reported doing in 2025
Closeclose (collaborative learning in ocular surface education) is a 5-phase, year-long program, intended to help clinicians implement dry eye diagnostics and treatments into practice.according to the american optometric association, more than 16 million americans suffer from dry eye disease (ded).the prevalence of diagnosed and undiagnosed ded is significant, and can be caused by gender, aging, medical conditions, medications, ocular health, environment, contact lens wear and lifestyle.eye care professionals need to understand how to accurately identify, diagnose, assess, and treat dry eye, including the underlying causes. The closeinitiative elevates practitioners' adoption of dry eye management into practice. This enables practitioners to incorporate dry eye through a simplified identification algorithm and a streamlined treatment implementation strategy.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 81% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 75
- Transparency & Controls: 86
- Accountability: 50
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
- Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: -0.8%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.2%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 32.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 39.1% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 32.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $958K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $93K · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2022 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.