Hawaii Association of Nurse Anesthesiology
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 205131527
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- Honolulu, HI, USA
- Phone
- 8084288172
- Rating confidence
- Limited
- Sector
- Nursing Services (General)
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $89,376
- Expenses
- $17,708
- Assets
- $436,073
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
9 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JIM MALISZEWSKYJ (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JIM MALISZEWSKYJ (PRESIDENT)
- KIT NG (TREASURER)
- PETER KACHUR (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The purpose of the association is: a) to advocate and promote the practice of nurse anesthesia. B) to promote continual quality anesthesia care. C) to promote the interests of hana members and cooperate with the national association, the american association of nurse anesthesiology (aana). D) to facilitate cooperation between certified registered nurse anesthetists (crnas), the nursing profession, anesthesiologists, other members of the medical profession, hospitals and agencies representing a community of interest in nurse anesthesia.
What it reported doing in 2024
Hana conducted an in-person continuing medical education (cme) conference on august 17, 2025. It offered hana members and crnas educational opportunities that promote the continual quality of anesthesia care and update of healthcare rules and regulations. This was measured by the number of attendants and feedback through official evaluation form. The cme conference was in compliance with national recertification requirements of 100 hours every four years and passing of the recertification examination.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 81
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 80.2%; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 24.63; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 2.7% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 1 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- 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.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.