Harvest India

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
571224018
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
9497019296
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Centers to Support the Independence of Specific Populations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,435,501
Expenses
$785,314
Assets
$4,812,825
Liabilities
$6,415

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • TRICIA SCHEINOHA (CHAIR./EXEC): $25,420 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide humanitarian aid to the poor and oppressed of asia by providing food and other subsistence, medical supplies, housing, and other relief.

What it reported doing in 2024

Mercy ministries and education - relationships are pivotal to lasting change. Through meeting both practical and tangible needs, trust is built and communication begun. Hundreds of thousands of men, women, and children have been impacted through our mercy ministries which include, but are not limited to fresh water well installation, weekly food distribution, medical camps & hospitals, disaster relief, emergency care and shelter, hospice care for those afflicted with HIV/AIDS, elderly homes, red light district ministry & restoration, and monthly food & medical aid to those afflicted with leprosy. We acknowledge that true freedom will only come through the ability to make choices, gain willful employment, and pass this invaluable gift onto future generations. Education is the key. We continue to make a growing investment in the future of asia through education in these ways: 2 elementary schools, 2 junior colleges, 1 technical college, and 5 nursing colleges.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 82% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. 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: 40
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 89
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 25.9%; rating input score 26
  • Program expense ratio: 64.7%; rating input score 65
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.61 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 67.8%; rating input score 96; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.13; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.4% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 25.9% of revenue deployed · 64.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $508K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $25K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 26/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.