Khalsa Aid International USA Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831788197
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Vacaville, CA, USA
Phone
9168657750
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Disaster Preparedness and Relief Services
Affiliation
Sikhism

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,378,355
Expenses
$2,481,265
Assets
$7,789,441
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

People named in this filing

  • OMAR R SINGH (DIRECTOR)
  • AMARJIT SINGH BANSAL (DIRECTOR)
  • HARPREET SINGH MANN (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To relieve persons, whether or not they are residents of teh united states of america or abroad, who are in conditions of need, hardship, or distress as a result of local, national or international disaster or by reason oof their social and economic circumstances, with regard to special needs of displaced persons and refugees; and to collaborate with and promote the activities of khalsa aid international USA inc in the futherance of its activities in the united states and internationally.

What it reported doing in 2024

To relieve persons, whether or not they are residents of the united states of america or abroad, who are in conditions of need, hardship, or distress as a result of local, national or international disaster or by reason of their social and economic circumstances, with regard to special needs of displaced persons and refugees; and to collaborate with and promote the activities of khalsa aid international USA inc in the futherance of its activities in the united states and internationally.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 69% for direct work, and 31% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • 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: 99.5%; rating input score 99; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -80%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.14; rating input score 76; 76th 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: 30.1% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32.6% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.