Watches for Good Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 852015056
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Greenville, NC, USA
- Phone
- 2155791580
- Rating
- 81
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $31,463
- Expenses
- $61,616
- Assets
- $123,372
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- CHRIS CHIN (CLO)
- NIRDHAR KHAZANIE (CO-FOUNDER &)
- RAJA RAMASWAMY (DIRECTOR)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Transparency is key: we believe spent contributions should be accounted for in this non-profit and thats exactly why we pledge to share our financials for every effort. You, our loyal patrons, will have transparency into how our funds are utilized and for what efforts. When you donate to watches for good, you should have a sense of pride and comfort that theres accountability. Education: every child deserves the right to an education which is why were committed to volunteering and providing schools across the world with the proper resources they need. We believe this support can come in various forms: supplemental tutoring, assistance with technology in purchasing laptops, school supplies, and more. Hunger: watches for good hopes to help combat hunger worldwide as every human life is equally important regardless of race, religion, gender, or geographic location; we are here to serve the world. Covid has disrupted food supply chains in the some of the worlds largest producing markets, n
What it reported doing in 2024
In 2024, watches for good volunteers accomplished the following campaigns: 1) israel/gaza humanitarian efforts: watches for good provided humanitarian relief efforts in the form of medical aid kits, blankets, drones, and shelter support to refugees and displaced people. 2) ahimsa campaign: watches for good a staunch supporter of the conscious cafeteria project, recognized the broader implications of reducing plastic use beyond public schools. By partnering with the conscious cafeteria project, ahimsa was able to donate 4,000 foodware kits to kipp nyc school cafeterias in New York city to transition to reusable alternatives.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 89
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 35
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -95.8%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -88.5% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -91.9% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $62K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 13 of 13 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- 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.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.