The Indus Entrepreneurs Seattle

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
912135531
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Edmonds, WA, USA
Phone
2063552521
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$167,677
Expenses
$183,598
Assets
$141,087
Liabilities
$7,705

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SONU AGGARWAL (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MINEE VERMA (EXECUITVE DIRECTOR)
  • SONU AGGARWAL (PRESIDENT)
  • KISHOR PANPALIYA (BOARD MEMBER)

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

The objective of the entrepreneurs, seattle (tie - seattle) is the promotion of business interest of members of the indus community. The activities of tie-seattle consist of monthly mmeting among members, meeting with speakers, and educational forums and conferences. Meetings and conferences carry a nonimal charge to cover the expenses.

What it reported doing in 2025

TiE is a non-profit, global community welcoming entrepreneurs from all over the world. We believe in the power of ideas to change the face of entrepreneurship and growing business through our five pillars; mentoring, networking, education, incubating and funding. TiE was founded in 1992 by a group of successful entrepreneurs and is currently the world's largest entrepreneurial organization out there. With programs like TiE Young Entrepreneurs (TYE) and Mentor Match, TiE is reaching out and fostering the next generation of entrepreneurs.

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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 26
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -9.5%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.77; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 32.7%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 14/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 25/100.