Hh Dorje Chang Buddha Iii Cultural and Art Museum
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 954562461
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Covina, CA, USA
- Phone
- 6262816378
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Arts, Cultural Organizations - Multipurpose
- Affiliation
- Buddhism
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $739,213
- Expenses
- $493,338
- Assets
- $8,416,853
- Liabilities
- $61,859
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
8 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- KATHERINE K HSU (CEO)
People named in this filing
- KATHERINE K HSU (CEO)
- SU CHING CHEN (Director)
- I CHING LEE (Director)
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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The h.h. Dorje chang buddha iii cultural and art museum was founded in 2014. It is anon-profit organization that was funded and established by a group of people in losangeles, who respectfully admires the tremendously great ethics and moral charactersof h.h. Dorje chang buddha iii, out of their own initiative and own will. H.h. Dorjechang buddha iii, who has no relationship with the museum, neither has ever beeninvolved in the operation or the management of the museum, nor owns any shares of the museum, nor has ever been a staff or an advisor of any kind for the museum.the mission of h.h. Dorje chang buddha iii cultural and art museum is to promote thesuperb accomplishments of h.h. Dorje chang buddha iii by displaying his achievementsin culture, literature, philosophy, art , science, technology, and other fields.in so doing, visitors to the museum will come to know and learn from the noble ethics and morality of h.h. Dorje chang buddha iii and the holy character of thismagnificent, sel
What it reported doing in 2025
Expenses related to organization's mission
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 87% 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. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 88
- Accountability: 88
- Sustainability: 84
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 72.2%; rating input score 72
- Program expense ratio: 92.8%; rating input score 93
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 33.3%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 17.06; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -11% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4.5% per year; rating input score 100; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 72.2% of revenue deployed · 92.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $458K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
- Consistency: 25 of 26 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- 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 — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.