Kanchi Guruparampara Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472746457
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Official website data refreshed
Jun 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Carpentersville, IL, United States
Phone
+(847) 586-3032
Rating
59
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Hinduism
Affiliation
Hinduism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$956,674
Expenses
$982,436
Assets
$138,049
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mahesh Krishnamoorthy (President)
  • Swaminathan Sridhar (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Mahesh Krishnamoorthy (President)
  • Sriram Balachandra (Secretary)
  • Swaminathan Sridhar (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide quality education, better medical facilities nutrition food to the under privileged sections of the society. Read More Support For Poor When we use the word compassion, it sounds a bit condescending. It is as though, the one who bestows compassion is at a higher level, and the one who receives it is on a lower one. When we start looking down on the person we help, that very act of charity becomes unclean. When we help others, we should develop simplicity, humility, and negation of ego. On the other hand, if we think we are obliging somebody by bestowing help on them, it leads to arrogance. Instead of elevating our soul, it will degrade the same. It is better to use the word love instead of compassion, because it is more of an equalizer. Love is something we instinctively show to those who are our o.

What it reported doing in 2024

Shree Panduranga Charities This amount was utilized for creating infrastructure facility for the upcoming Sri Vittal Rukmini Sarva Shaka Vidhyalayaa

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 56
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 8th 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.7%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.14; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 85th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.3% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.5% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 99.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $980K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 15 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.