Research Education and Development Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 453776491
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2016, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2018
- Location
- White Plains, NY, USA
- Phone
- 9144280960
- Rating
- 50
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- International Relief
- Affiliation
- Hinduism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $61,644
- Expenses
- $33,594
- Assets
- $169,670
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Mrs Sanskriti Thakur (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Mrs Nirupama Nigam (Director / Trustee)
- Dr Sunder S Thakur (Managing Trustee)
- Vimal Patel (Treasurer)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See Schedule O, Statement 3
What it reported doing in 2025
These funds were distributed to REaD Foundation's partner NGOs in India based on REaD's due diligence and inputs received from the donors.These funds were allocated to organizations focused on providing access to education, health care and social Justice to underserved /underprivileged at-risk groups.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. 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: 1
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 80
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.9%; rating input score 1
- Program expense ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 2
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 45.5%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.05; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 13.9% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.9% of revenue deployed · 1.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $547 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- 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 1/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 2/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.