Sitanjali Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
463127066
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Santa Ana, CA, USA
Phone
8778295500
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,152,689
Expenses
$1,337,437
Assets
$1,683
Liabilities
$20,985

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HARSHAD UKA (CEO)
  • HARSHAD UKA (CEO)

People named in this filing

  • HARSHAD UKA (CEO)
  • NAYNA UKA (Director)
  • RAJ PATEL (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

Sitanjali Foundation, is a non-profit Foundation and shall be operated exclusively for educational and charitable purposes within the meaning of Section 501 (c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, or the corresponding section of any future Federal tax code. Sitanjali Foundations purpose is to address, educate, coordinate, and provide aid and relief to eradicate chronic malnutrition and hunger on a local and global level.

What it reported doing in 2024

Construction of new schoolscompleted 3 projects in chovisi, pardi and soldhara, gujarat, india and commenced 3 new projects in sarpor, palsana and vaghabari - see below. Combined construction costs were $695,216completed-chovisi primary school- this was a complete ground up construciton of a dangerous, old and poorly constructed school building to a modern 3 floor 20 classroom school (including computer room, rest-rooms and library), which increased the student capacity to 1000 for grades 1-8. The new school is currently operational and a continuing maintenance / improvement plan has been implemented to ensure its survival-pardi primary school - this was a complete ground up construciton of a 110 year old dangerous, wooden structure to a modern 3 floor 15 classroom school (including computer room, rest-rooms and library), which increased the student capacity to 300 for grades 1-8. The new school is currently operational and a continuing maintenance paln implemented to ensure its survival. In 2024 completed the final building and a 300ft compound wall with a gate to ensure the safety of the students.-soldhara primary school : village - population -1,200. Number of students 175. Grades 1-8. This is a 12,000 sq.ft building with 12 rooms. Construction for main building is reinforced cement concrete (rcc). The expected life of the building is 100-125 years with proper maintenance. All old buildings were demolished except one and ground was cleared. The saved building was used to store construction materials. Once construction was complete, the last building was demolished and the ground was cleared. Current open ground can accommodate about 350 students for an event.and commenced-sarpor crematorium- there is no decent cremation facilirty in surrounding villages. This crematorium will serve 12 surrounding villages. The was an open piece of land available owned by the government. This land was allocated for this purpose. Village people are assisting in this construction. There is a storage room for wood and a lrge assembly area for attendees. There will be 2 cremation stations including ash disposal. Estated completed-palsana library - the town has a population of 5000 and 6 schools. This library will serve all of the students for these schools as well as the local population-vaghabari high school: village - population -1,200. Number of students 200. Grades 9-12. This is a 6,000 sq.ft building with 6 rooms. Construction for main building is reinforced cement concrete (rcc). The expected life of the building is 100-125 years with proper maintenance. All old buildings were demolished except one and ground was cleared. The old building will be used for library and computer room.social welfaresitanjali contributed $298,237 towards several other social welfare organisations and inviduals meeting the organizations mission.diamonds in the dirtcontinued "diamonds in dirt" program. Under this program students in canada, USA, germany and india would be sponsored. The students are financially weak and they would have to quit the student programs without this aid. The students were selected on a case by case basis. During the year we assisted xxx students with $329,465 donated towards edcuational assistance

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 99
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 15
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.9%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: $202.47 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 92; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th 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: 19.2%; rating input score 19; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 57
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -16%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 12.47; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 15.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13.6% per year; rating input score 0; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 4 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 18 of 20 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2016 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 19/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 0/100.