Foundation of the Sacred Stream

Legal name: The Foundation of the Sacred Stream

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
320042442
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2016
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Berkeley, CA, US
Phone
(415) 333-1434
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Buddhism
Affiliation
Buddhism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$297,098
Expenses
$296,257
Assets
$810,661
Liabilities
$9,808

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Isa Gucciardi (Exec Director): $52,885 total reported compensation
  • Laura Chandler (General Manager): $33,654 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Sacred Stream is a non-profit organization and school for consciousness studies dedicated to bringing the wisdom of ancient spiritual and healing traditions into the awareness of contemporary society.

What it reported doing in 2016

Religious Certification Programs, which are primarily based on Buddhist principals, are designed to provide students with proficiency in Integrated Energy Medicine, Applied Shamanism, Buddhist Psychology Studies and/or Depth Hypnosis healing techniques. Certification is available for Depth Hypnosis Practitioners and for those that complete their studies in the Minister Education Program. In order to complete the Minister Education Program, a student is required to demonstrate proficiency in all four areas of study noted above and particularly in understanding how Buddhist principals inform the other studies in the certification program. The Depth Hypnosis Practitioner Program and the Minister Education Program develop ministers and practitioners who support the members of the community in their individual spiritual healing paths.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 98% 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.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 57
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.2%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 64.1%; rating input score 64
  • 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 16th 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: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.74; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.2%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 64.2% of revenue deployed · 64.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $190K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $53K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2010 to 2016
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.