Oom Yung Doe Kirkland

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
822858274
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2020
Location
Kirkland, WA, USA
Phone
4258036800
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Physical Fitness and Community Recreational Facilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$597,320
Expenses
$591,261
Assets
$174,410
Liabilities
$3,931

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELLE JUDY (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • CASEY EKMAN (INSTRUCTOR): $63,510 total reported compensation
  • JAMES KEYES (INSTRUCTOR): $49,200 total reported compensation
  • MICHELLE JUDY (President): $44,100 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Oom yung doe kirkland teaches the traditional line of moe doe knowledge as it has been taught over the centuries. It is our hope to apply the morals of chung doe to our lives and to follow the principles of honor, interity, loyalty, and compassion above all else. Our hope is to remain open and willing to learn, through good communication, help continue this tradition of knowledge for others to follow. We strive to promote health and wellness in our community through traditional martial arts.

What it reported doing in 2025

General membership for students of all ages. Youth students (under age 16) focus on developing not just physical strength, flexibility, and coordination, but also mental discipline, determination, and focus. Skills that will help them avoid peer pressure and other negative social situations. Adult students learn correct and balanced movements from all eight styles. Movements include long and short forms (sequences of movements), practical self-defense techniques, and foundational movements as well as how to incorporate meditation in order to protect and enhance the effectiveness of their practice. The correct and balanced nature of the program, as well as the individual attention given to each student makes this training effective for all ages body types and conditions. An additional location was opened during 2023 to accomodate demand in the California.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 62% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 93%; rating input score 93
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 1%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.1%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17.1% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.7% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.3% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 93% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $563K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 20 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 8 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 34/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.