Hawaii Pacific Export Council

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
203210275
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Honolulu, HI, USA
Phone
8085228040
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$62,000
Expenses
$62,236
Assets
$157,731
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

People named in this filing

  • ASHLEY HARDING (DIRECTOR)
  • BERNICE PARSONS (DIRECTOR)
  • BETTY HOANG BROW (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Provide training/counseling to potential us exporters.

What it reported doing in 2024

Public outreach programs about the benefits of exporting. Mentoring of small businesses that are working to become new exporters or develop more effective exporting competencies. Export counseling and training at small business fairs, videotaping training sessions to make them available to firms on other islands, briefings on trends and techniques for exporting success in specific countries.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 56
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.5%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 77.2%; rating input score 77

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -0.4%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.53; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.2% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.5% per year; rating input score 0; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.5% of revenue deployed · 77.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 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.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.