Friendship Garden Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990186050
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2024
Location
Honolulu, HI, USA
Phone
8082217439
Rating
61
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$523,269
Expenses
$15,228
Assets
$777,768
Liabilities
$8,500

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACK NS GILLMAR (PRESIDENT/TR)

People named in this filing

  • JACK NS GILLMAR (PRESIDENT/TR)
  • JANET GILLMAR (VP/SECRETARY)
  • DON HIBBARD (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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To preserve and maintain a 10 acre garden at kokokahi, kaneohe, oahu for public enjoyment

What it reported doing in 2025

Public education: an orientation and announcement bulletin board and seating area greet visitors at the entry shelter under the historic camper cabin. This orientation rest area provides garden maps with a brief history of the garden on the back. Directional and information signs exist in the garden where necessary. Signs are kept to a minimum so as to not disturb enjoyment of views of the surrounding landscape. Plant identification signs installed years ago as a boy scout project will be replaced with qr signs identifying the plants, buildings and other features in the garden. The tool and supplies were entirely funded by volunteers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 37
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 66
  • Sustainability: 92
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 5.9%; rating input score 6
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 62.5%; rating input score 62; 16th 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 97.1%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 51.07; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 18.4% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 5.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 8 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 6/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 59/100.