Chopra Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
421480296
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014
Location
Carlsbad, CA, USA
Phone
7694941625
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,388,279
Expenses
$641,257
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PAUL JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • RINALDO BRUTOCO (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • AJAY GUPTA (TREASURER)
  • DEEPAK CHOPRA (CHAIRMAN)
  • PAUL JOHNSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

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 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The chopra foundation is dedicated to improving health and well being, cultivating spiritual knowledge, expanding consciousness, and promoting world peace to all members of the human family.

What it reported doing in 2014

Donated money to the sonima health and wellness foundation to help develop health and wellness programs and train local educators in various school districts in California, Florida, New York and Texas.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 88% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 67% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 51
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 41.6%; rating input score 42
  • Program expense ratio: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $313.49 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 99.7%; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 53.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 85; 85th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -74.2% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -47% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 41.6% of revenue deployed · 90.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 9 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 11 filed program accomplishments · $578K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2010 to 2014
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 9 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 42/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.