Hawaii Surfing Association

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990341432
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Kailua, HI, USA
Phone
8082639322
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports Competitions

Reported finances

Revenue
$236,860
Expenses
$227,444
Assets
$82,001
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WENDELL AOKI (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
  • JACK SHIPLEY (VICE-PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • WENDELL AOKI (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR): $27,889 total reported compensation
  • RAYMOND SHITO (TREASURER & DIRECTOR): $2,775 total reported compensation
  • JACK SHIPLEY (VICE-PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR): $500 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The primary purpose of Hawaii amateur surfing association (hasa) is to promote and conduct amateur surf competitions for all people and ages; and, to preserve, protect and enhance public awareness for both the coastal environment and surfing resources, not only around the hawaiian islands, but also, throughout the world.

What it reported doing in 2025

Line#94 membership dues and assessments: the membership dues contributed significantly to hasa's exempt purposes by establishing a formal organized surf entity where mostly youth-aged surfers could become a part of an organization. The annual dues paid entitles the members to pay a reduced entrance fee by $20 to $25 per event. The sense of belonging to an organization and the reduced entrance fee helps hasa to recruit new membership by 5% to 10% over the past few years. With the increase in membership hasa was able to enhance public awareness by providing competitive amateur surf competitions to more surfers. In addition, the organization promotes local surfers to compete in the upcoming 2020 olympic games in japan.

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 100% 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

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: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 9
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 75.4%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 78.5%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.36; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.7%; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.6% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 75.4% of revenue deployed · 78.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $179K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $28K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 19/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 24/100.