Hale Halawai Ohana O Hanalei

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990304903
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Hanalei, HI, USA
Phone
8088261011
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Neighborhood Centers

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$388,643
Expenses
$941,074
Assets
$4,160,711
Liabilities
$13,771

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kaylee Kim (Interim Executive Director)
  • Blake Conant (President)
  • Charlie Cowden (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kathleen Conant (Chief Strategy Officer): $118,741 total reported compensation
  • Kaylee Kim (Interim Executive Director): $69,045 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to create and sustain a gathering place for cultural education and for community engagement and actions to support social, civic and recreation events that perpetuate the value of aloha and the betterment of our community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Operated a multi-purpose community service facility and central learning hub that delivered vital social, educational, and nutritional services to approximately 10,000 North Shore residents and visitors from Anahola to Ha? ena. The facility provided subsidized, affordable infrastructure for key community programs, including daily keiki (youth) enrichment activities, weekly public health and wellness education classes, and a certified community kitchen. Additionally, the organization maintained the facility as a critical emergency shelter and operational staging site for regional first responders, residents, and visitors during severe weather incidents and Kuhio Highway road closures. By maintaining this central learning center and gathering space, the organization facilitated affordable access to social, educational, and nutritional services for the diverse local population.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for grants.

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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 90
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 90.2%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.88 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -142.1%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.42; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20%; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 90.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $849K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $119K · 10 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 35 of 35 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 18/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.