Gyalshen Institute for the Study of Zhang-Zhung and Tibetan Culture Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 450726326
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2015–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2025
- Location
- Studio City, CA, USA
- Phone
- 8184552738
- Rating
- 89
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Buddhism
- Affiliation
- Buddhism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $101,151
- Expenses
- $137,815
- Assets
- $74,282
- Liabilities
- $12,920
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Joyce Asmussen (President)
- Mark Hammons (Executive Director/Treasurer/Board Member)
People named in this filing
- Joyce Asmussen (President)
- Lhundup Gyatso (Spiritual Director/Board Member)
- Robin Haaland (Board Member)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Gyalshen Institute offers public teachings about the ancient Tibetan Bon spiritual tradition, and supports educational and charitable causes related to that religious community.
What it reported doing in 2025
Provide support for the presentation of Tibetan Bon Buddhist spiritual practices, literature, and cultural history, including teaching events, meditation retreats, and ritual celebrations.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 72% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 100
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 15
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -36.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.54; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 69.5%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 10.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $138K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 40/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 17/100.