Skip to content
Himalayan Cataract Project Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Himalayan Cataract Project Inc

We enable countries to cure avoidable blindness by developing high quality, cost-effective eye care in underserved areas of the world.

$27M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$602k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2024.

International$875kHealth$624kReligion$392kEducation$225kPublic Safety & Disaster$23k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $1,504,876, the rows itemized in this filing. The $26,736,753 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $25,231,877 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k3 grants · $453k
  • $250k+2 grants · $1.1M
$161,637
Median grant
5
States reached
$41M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SERGE GLOBAL INC$602,173
HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL$450,001
THE CARTER CENTER$161,637
LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY$150,000
EYE CORPS$141,065
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 62% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SURGIVISION CONSULTANTS INC: $23k → 11%SERGE GLOBAL INC: $602k → 7%STANFORD UNIVERSITY: $225k → 8%SEVA FOUNDATION: $46k → 10%SEE INTERNATIONAL: $96k → 14%HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $450k → 17%EYE CORPS: $141k → 14%LIONS WORLD VISION INSTITUTE INC: $551k → 13%THE CARTER CENTER INC: $160k → 13%THE CARTER CENTER INC: $210k → 14%SIGHT FOR SOULS: $29k → 9%SAFE SURGERY INITIATIVE INC: $20k → 11%SERGE GLOBAL INC: $392k → 7%LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $150k → 8%SEE INTERNATIONAL: $16k → 14%HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $347k → 17%LIONS WORLD VISION INSTITUTE INC: $24k → 13%THE CARTER CENTER: $162k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Grants abroad, by region: $25M on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 7 regions, $25M to organizations and $13k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$12M · 49% · 61 grants · 1 person

Stated purpose: GRANTS PROVIDED TO SUPPORT BLINDNESS ALLEVIATION PROGRAM; EYE SURGERY; SURGICAL EQUIPMENT AND EDUCATION. IN KIND GRANTS OF EQUIPMENT AND TRAINING. · GRANTS PROVIDED AS DETAILED ON FIRST LINE OF PART II. · FELLOWSHIP

South Asia$12M · 46% · 23 grants

Stated purpose: GRANTS PROVIDED AS DETAILED ON FIRST LINE OF PART II.

East Asia and the Pacific$784k · 3% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: GRANTS PROVIDED AS DETAILED ON FIRST LINE OF PART II.

South America$158k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GRANTS PROVIDED AS DETAILED ON FIRST LINE OF PART II.

Europe (including Iceland and Greenland)$139k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GRANTS PROVIDED AS DETAILED ON FIRST LINE OF PART II.

Central America and the Caribbean$87k · 0% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: GRANTS PROVIDED AS DETAILED ON FIRST LINE OF PART II.

North America (Canada and Mexico)$25k · 0% · 1 grant · 1 person

Stated purpose: GRANTS PROVIDED AS DETAILED ON FIRST LINE OF PART II. · FELLOWSHIP

How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.0M · 5 repeat orgs$260k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
4

Total granted

$3.0M
$119k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
+10%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $141k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’23’24’25
InternationalHealthOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • HK
    HELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL
    2× · 2024–2025 · $797k · revenue +59%
  • LW
    LIONS WORLD VISION INSTITUTE INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $575k · revenue +74%
  • TC
    THE CARTER CENTER INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $532k · revenue +6%

Funded once

  • SF
    SEVA FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $46k · revenue +10%
  • SF
    SIGHT FOR SOULS
    one grant, 2024 · $29k · revenue -30%
  • SC
    SURGIVISION CONSULTANTS INC
    one grant, 2023 · $23k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Himalayan Cataract Project Inc

We enable countries to cure avoidable blindness by developing high quality, cost-effective eye care in underserved areas of the world.

International
2
Restoringvision

To empower lives by restoring vision for millions of people in need.

Health
3
Eyecare for Humanity
—
4
Sight Org

Sight.org exists to proclaim the gospel to the most unserved regions of Africa by combating blindness through surgery and prevention.

International
5
Vision for Africa
Religion
6
International Eye Foundation

International eye foundation works to prevent blindness and restore sight by building capacity for quality, comprehensive and sustainable eye care services worldwide.

International
7
Eversight

Eversight's mission is to restore sight and prevent blindness through the healing power of donation, transplantation and research. Blinding eye diseases affect 80 million Americans. That means millions of people cannot see their loved…

—
8
Project Orbis International Inc

Orbis works around the world to prevent blindness and restore sight for people in places where eye care is out of reach, ensuring vision impairment does not adversely affect whether people can learn, work, or thrive overall. with the right…

International
9
Vision Outreach International Inc

Restore sight to the blind poor in remote regions of the world; connecting eye care professionals around the world.

Health
10
Servants for Sight

Servants For Sight's mission is to help disadvantaged people, in South Carolina and in third world countries, get the eye care they need to lead productive lives. We provide eye exams, eyeglasses and surgery to poverty stricken and…

Health
11
Unite for Sight Inc

Empower communities worldwide to improve eye health and eliminate preventable blindness.

Health
12
Optometry Giving Sight

Optometry giving sight targets the prevention of blindness & impaired vision due to uncorrected refractive error through education, training, service delivery and advocacy.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seva Foundation; the most unlike its peers is The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 11 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SERGE GLOBAL INC: $994,346 · OtherSERGE GLOBAL INCLIONS WORLD VISION INSTITUTE INC: $575,255 · OtherLIONS WORLD VISION INSTITUTE INC+2 more: $43,373 · OtherHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $796,561 · InternationalHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONALTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $531,523 · InternationalTHE CARTER CENTER INCSURGICAL EYE EXPEDITIONS INTERNATIONAL INC: $112,140 · InternationalSURGICAL EYE EXPEDITIONS INTERNATIONAL INC+1 more: $46,188 · InternationalTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $375,000 · EducationTHE BOARD O…EYE CORPS INC: $141,065 · HealthSIGHT FOR SOULS: $28,985 · Health
Other$1,612,974International$1,486,412Education$375,000Health$170,050

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSERGE GLOBAL INC: $994,346 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $796,561 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetLIONS WORLD VISION INSTITUTE INC: $575,255 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $531,523 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $375,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSURGICAL EYE EXPEDITIONS INTERNATIONAL INC: $112,140 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetSEVA FOUNDATION: $46,188 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSIGHT FOR SOULS: $28,985 over 1y, 12% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Himalayan Cataract Project Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Himalayan Cataract Project Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Lions World Vision Institute Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 11 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Himalayan Cataract Project’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home