Sacred Harvest Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300118912
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Costa Mesa, CA, USA
Phone
9497520274
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Foundations
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,960,986
Expenses
$6,263,878
Assets
$2,804,044
Liabilities
$310

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Stephen Komanapalli (Vice President)
  • Susan J Perry (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Stephen Komanapalli (Vice President): $216,905 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide training and support of Christian Organizations and leaders in Orange County, CA; Maui, HI; Mindanao, Philippines, along with making grants in organizations in those communities.

What it reported doing in 2024

Sacred Harvest Foundation provided the following in grants: $8,552,832 excluding the Philippines. In the Philippines, Sacred Harvest funded organizations with $915,000 for a combined total of $9,467,832.In addition, Sacred harvest assisted nonprofits in the United States and Philippines. In Orange County, Sacred Harvest coached 7 organizations in capability and capacity building for their organization while in the Philippines we've worked with 7 as well. Since 2014, we jave wprled wotj 163 organziations.The organization maintains a Donor Advised Fund, over which it has full authority to make recommendations, from which it makes regular grants to the 501(c)(3) charities that it supports. At least annually the Board of Directors meets to review the past year's results of such charities, but also to approve grants for th coming year. 99% of our grants are made via our DAF at the National Christian Foundation, it's supported organization. In 2024, the principals of the foundation contributed $5,044,403 to the foundations accounts at NCF.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 81% of its reported program spending out as 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 73
  • Sustainability: 22
  • Growth: 20

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 71.4%; rating input score 71; 15th 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: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -219.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.45; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.5%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.7% per year; rating input score 0; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -12.1% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $6.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $217K · 8 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.