Us-india Strategic Partnership Forum Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822265517
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2126848601
Rating
64
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$7,534,775
Expenses
$6,596,279
Assets
$7,119,958
Liabilities
$5,634,930

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

52 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR Mukesh Aghi (President & Treasurer)

Highest reported compensation

  • DR Mukesh Aghi (President & Treasurer): $1,035,900 total reported compensation
  • Gaurav Verma (COO): $813,189 total reported compensation
  • NOLTY THERIOT (Senior VP, Policy Advocacy): $306,532 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Activities include creating a powerful strategic partnership between the U.S. & India and promoting bilateral trade. It is about business and government coming together in new ways to create meaningful opportunities for citizens.

What it reported doing in 2024

USISPF Annual West Coast Summit - Annual West Coast summit is an annual summit that brings together big industry leaders from business, government and academia to talk about US India partnership. It serves as a platform to disucss policy, innovation and strategic objectives as it relates to the US India partnership.The event took place on July 25, 2024

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 43
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.3%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 72.3%; rating input score 72
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.93 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 12.5%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.08; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.79; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 39.3%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.3% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.8% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.3% of revenue deployed · 72.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 47 of 47 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1M · 52 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $101K reported
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes foreign activity and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 34/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 10/100.