Hawaii Crop Improvement Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990258882
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Waimea, HI, USA
Phone
8082125602
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,203
Expenses
$226,269
Assets
$256,671
Liabilities
$5,981

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALAN TAKEMOTO (PRESIDENT)
  • LESLIE CAMPANIANO (VICE-PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARK STOUTEMYER (DIRECTOR)
  • WARREN MAYBERRY (DIRECTOR)
  • JOSH UYEHARA (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

Educational efforts to inform the general public, in the state of Hawaii, about agriculture, biotechnology, crop improvement and alternative crops.

What it reported doing in 2025

Grants collected were contracted to an independent consultant that provided services in three functional areas: 1) organizational development-consultant, as the contracted executive director, is responsible for strengthening the organization, general administration and management of the organization, securing and providing oversight of grant funds and delivery of services by other vendors. 2) outreach-consultant, as the contracted executive director, provides oversight and coordination of hcia's voluntary outreach education program, outreach events such as farmer-to-farmer and community outreach with the Hawaii philippine centennial trade expo and summit, hfbf farm fair, etc. 3) the organization's advocacy efforts are to bring attention and awareness to the Hawaii state legislators about the new alternative grown crops in the state of Hawaii, and how it can help benifit the state's economic condition during the 2013 legislative session,

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 filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 12
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

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: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -185.7%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.13; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 44% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -16.3% per year; rating input score 0; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 11 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 29/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.