GHEDI Global A Nonprofit Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 333118030
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Dover, DE, USA
- Phone
- 4109295557
- Rating
- 46
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Professional Societies, Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $230,811
- Expenses
- $135
- Assets
- $230,676
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Subhash Chandir (Director and CEO)
- Danya Arif Siddiqi (Director and Dy CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Nasreen Molla Adamjee (Director): $26,341 total reported compensation
- Danya Arif Siddiqi (Director and Dy CEO): $24,840 total reported compensation
- Itrat Fatima Raza (Director): $6,727 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To empower underserved communities in the United States and internationally to overcome barriers and expand access to health education and development opportunities through collaboration and innovation.
What it reported doing in 2025
The organization implemented a charitable public health research program in collaboration with the Lead Exposure Elimination Project to generate evidence on turmeric adulteration and associated lead exposure risks in Pakistan where food-based lead contamination remains an important public health concern. Lead is a potent neurotoxin and there is no safe level of lead exposure particularly for children and pregnant women. Prior analyses have reported lead concentrations of 1,000-2,000 g g in turmeric. The program supported the organizations exempt purposes by producing evidence to inform prevention strategies strengthen consumer protection support safer food systems and enable communities to make safer consumption decisions. Program activities included the design and implementation of a cross-sectional market survey across major wholesale and retail spice markets. Activities included survey development and programming field team training piloting market mapping and structured data collection using digital tools supported by continuous field monitoring and post-fieldwork data verification. A total of 361 surveys including 64 retailers and 297 consumers were conducted across two large cities. The program generated evidence on turmeric purchasing patterns supply chain dynamics packaging practices and awareness of adulteration and lead contamination risks. Findings indicated that more than 85% of turmeric purchases and sales occurred in loose unpackaged form with low awareness of lead contamination risks among both consumers and vendors. Expected charitable outputs included a final analytical report validated datasets and operational insights to inform public awareness efforts regulatory engagement and market-level food safety interventions. The program identified key risk points in the turmeric supply chain and contributed evidence to support efforts to reduce lead exposure improve food safety and promote safer consumer practices.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 97% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Accountability: 58
- Sustainability: 86
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 44.4%; rating input score 44; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 99.9%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1,708.71; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: Limited
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $26K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- 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 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 44/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.