Habitat for Humanity Hawaii Island Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990355149
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kailuakona, HI, USA
Phone
8083318010
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Development, Construction, Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,011,008
Expenses
$1,159,371
Assets
$2,481,949
Liabilities
$988,829

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • HOBBS LOWSON (PRESIDENT/TREASURER)
  • GAIL NOEAU (VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • CHRIS MARLETT PATULSKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CHRIS MARLETT PATULSKI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $98,081 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Through the use of organization resources, combined with volunteer labor, build decent, simple, affordable housing or make critical repairs to existing housing. New homeowners are provided an affordable mortgage with very little or no interest charged, while homeowners of houses where critical repairs are conducted sign a promissory note to repay a portion of the cost of the repairs with no interest charged.

What it reported doing in 2024

Work closely with families from selection, through build process, and continuing through morgtgage pay off, offering support and education to selected families for their entire first time home ownership experience. Homeowners participation includes 500 sweat equity hours with the organizatioin and educational classes including homeowner financial literacy education.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 45
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.1%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 31.3%; rating input score 31
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.78 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -14.7%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.14; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.4; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.5%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.1% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 62.1% of revenue deployed · 31.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $363K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $98K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.