Wa Nam Buddhist Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
263597067
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022, Form 990-T 2022, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Alhambra, CA, USA
Phone
6262029119
Rating
33
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Buddhism
Affiliation
Buddhism

Reported finances

Revenue
$65,438
Expenses
$48,969
Assets
$1,030,964
Liabilities
$741,208

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

Leadership & pay

1 person listed

People named in this filing

  • NA

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Promote religious activities

What it reported doing in 2025

Promote religious spirits and living through religious activities

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
No current program activity. The filing reports no program spending for the current year.

The verdict

REVIEW - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 0
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 0 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Fail
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 25.2%; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 21.05; rating input score 81; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.72; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 1.4% per year; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 13.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 1 board members independent · 0 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 1 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 21 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.