Assistance League of Hawaii

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237024314
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Honolulu, HI, USA
Phone
8089461505
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Service Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$450,469
Expenses
$475,220
Assets
$1,669,366
Liabilities
$5,152

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARY MONOHON (PRESIDENT)
  • GLORIA MCGHEE-KOEL (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • HELEN TAUFA'ASAU (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • NANCY SPARACINO (DIRECTOR)
  • MARY MONOHON (PRESIDENT)
  • TRISH KILADIS (SECRETARY)

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

Assistance league volunteers transforming the lives of children and adults through community programs.

What it reported doing in 2024

We care programserved 2,800 children and adults on oahu, maui and kona in the following ways: - provided malama bears (comfort teddy bears) to several hospital pediatric wards, maui fire department stations, waikiki health path clinic and shelters for domestic abuse and youth protection services, giving comfort to those in traumatic situations.- supplied baby layettes to hospitals for new mothers at oahu hospitals.- supplied backpacks, personal hygiene items, clothing, flasks, blankets, and food items to a drop-in, at risk teenage shelter.- supplied shriners hospital with small activity items and trinkets for their patients' "treasure chest". - supplied clearning supplies, games and toys, pantry foods, clothing, diapers, etc. To transient residents of domestic abuse and transitional child housing.- supplied small household items, small electric appliances and clothing to youth transitioning from foster care to independent living.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • 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. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 49
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.2%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.22 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 87.3%; rating input score 87; 51st 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: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • 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: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -5.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.51; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.2% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $373K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 26 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 52/100.