India Philanthropy Alliance Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 921551709
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Hyattsville, MD, USA
- Phone
- 2022578739
- Rating
- 77
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $673,685
- Expenses
- $592,343
- Assets
- $406,592
- Liabilities
- $747
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
23 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAY SEHGAL (VICE PRESIDENT)
- MINOO GUPTA (PRESIDENT)
- ALEXANDER COUNTS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- MARGARET FOURRE (DEPUTY DIRECTOR): $105,040 total reported compensation
- ALEXANDER COUNTS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $103,078 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The india philanthropy alliance (ipa) is a nonprofit dedicated to accelerating the scale and impact of private american philanthropy to benefit social and economic development in india.
What it reported doing in 2024
Non-profit capacity building - ipa facilitates nonprofit capacity building through various tools and resources for board members, staff, or volunteers from its network of nonprofit, philanthropic, and charitable organizations dedicated to mobilizing people and funding in the united states (and elsewhere) to foster development in india. These might be leadership meetings, annual retreats, training webinars, and town halls on issues of common interest to leaders. We also organize webinars as part of our "critical dialogues" series on topics of interest to the community. The ipa also provides best practice guidelines on youth engagement and offers customized guidance and coaching to support network organizations to build and strengthen capacity in fundraising and management.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 78% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 77% for direct work, and 23% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 73
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 73.6%; rating input score 74
- Program expense ratio: 83.7%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $10.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 64.2%; rating input score 64; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 12.1%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.69; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 35.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 88.2% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 11.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 22.8% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 73.6% of revenue deployed · 83.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $496K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $105K · 23 people listed
- Consistency: 22 of 24 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 7 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.