Bongwon Sah Buddhist Temple
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 421743381
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2012–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Temple City, CA, USA
- Phone
- 2133839665
- Rating
- 36
- Verdict
- REVIEW
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Buddhism
- Affiliation
- Buddhism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $71,080
- Expenses
- $72,410
- Assets
- $93,552
- Liabilities
- $21,776
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
People named in this filing
- JAE DUK CHOI (BUDDHIST PRI)
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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of this organization is to operate a buddhist temple and monastery in order to carry out the correct doctrines, philosophies, practices and rituals of buddhism; to give the spiritual guidance and blessing based on great mercy, compassion, and the buddhisatva spirit of the mahayana buddhism; to operate educational institute and welfare organizations, giving professional training and wide understanding of buddhism and showing its spirit at work in the form of welfare works.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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
REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 43
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0.3%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0.3%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -1.9%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -14.7% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -5.2% per year; rating input score 0; 34th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0.3% of revenue deployed · 0.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $199 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 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.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.