Eyelliance Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
842711222
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
9174343099
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,524,876
Expenses
$1,899,375
Assets
$1,700,235
Liabilities
$29,991

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Elizabeth Smith (Co-founder/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • Elizabeth Smith (Co-founder/CEO): $214,988 total reported compensation
  • McDaniel Abigail (Global Director): $181,208 total reported compensation
  • Dawson Maggie (COO): $177,378 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Eyelliance is exclusively focused on driving global and national scale strategies to accelerate equitable access to eyeglasses. They advance four mutually reincorcing strategies: government delivery, sustainable financing, catalytic partnerships, and institutional advocacy.

What it reported doing in 2025

Gov delivery: enabling governments to efficiently integrate eyeglasses into public education and community health systems by systematizing proven models of delivery.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for 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: 61
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 56.5%; rating input score 56
  • Program expense ratio: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $11.91 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 76.6%; rating input score 77; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 24.8%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 42.8%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.8% per year; rating input score 100; 16th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 56.5% of revenue deployed · 75.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $215K · 10 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 56/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 42/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.