Vision to Learn
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 453457853
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2011
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8004105273
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Public Health Program (Includes General Health and Wellness Promotion Services)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $28,180,734
- Expenses
- $25,497,887
- Assets
- $21,041,701
- Liabilities
- $2,035,731
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
15 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- ANN HOLLISTER (PRESIDENT & CEO)
- JOAN CHU REESE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- ANN HOLLISTER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $250,000 total reported compensation
- PETER SILBERMAN (CHIEF GROWTH OFFICER): $229,960 total reported compensation
- JOHN KIM (CHIEF ADVANCEMENT OFFICER): $187,727 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Provide free eye exams and glasses to students and low-income communities.
What it reported doing in 2024
Provide free eye exams and glasses to students in low income communities. Since its founding in 2012, vision to learn has provided over 3.8 million vision screenings (273,618 in the year ended june 30, 2025), over 787,000 eye exams (107,520 in the year ended june 30, 2025), and over 657,000 pairs of glasses (93,225 in the year ended june 30, 2025) to kindergarten through high school students in low income communities in California and 15 other states in the united states. Vision to learn has visited over 6,980 schools and community organizations (1,817 in the year ended june 30, 2025) to provide this.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 74% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 74
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 55
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.8%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 81.4%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: $17.39 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 9.5%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.6%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 20.5% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 73.8% of revenue deployed · 81.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $20.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $250K · 15 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.5M reported
- Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 6 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.