Legacy of Yogi Bhajan Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200418002
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Santa Cruz, NM, USA
Phone
7033464489
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,212,832
Expenses
$1,252,794
Assets
$20,514,298
Liabilities
$2,469,668

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GURU SADHANA KAUR KHALSA (CEO OF LYF MANAGEMENT LLC)
  • SHAM KAUR KHALSA (President)
  • GURU SANGAT SINGH KHALSA (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • SATWANT SINGH KHALSA (Executive Dir.): $159,135 total reported compensation
  • BIBIJI INDERJIT KAUR (Director): $111,112 total reported compensation
  • GURU SADHANA KAUR KHALSA (CEO OF LYF MANAGEMENT LLC): $103,163 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O

What it reported doing in 2025

The primary mission of legacy of yogi bhajan foundation is to preserve and maintain and make available for the meditative public, those heritage properties that yogiji developed for future generations: guru ram das ashram in los angeles, guru ram das puri in New Mexico where summer solstice, children's camp and ladies camp are held and yogiji's espanola ranch. These properties were specifically designed for meditation, contemplation and prayer and are places where the public can directly experience yogiji's vision, personality and connection with guru ram das, the fourth sikh guru.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 59
  • Accountability: 77
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 44
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -3.3%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 16.37; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 10.8%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 98.1% of revenue deployed · 91.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 17 of 17 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 35 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 35/100.