Hawaiian Hope Org
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 474690540
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2023
- Forms available
- Form 990 2023, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Honolulu, HI, USA
- Phone
- 8083528800
- Rating
- 73
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Service Organizations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $314,239
- Expenses
- $187,766
- Assets
- $178,112
- Liabilities
- $11,338
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2023. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
4 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Timothy Ching (President)
- Joy PATTERSON (Vice President)
- Curtis Kropar (Executive Director)
People named in this filing
- Timothy Ching (President)
- Joy PATTERSON (Vice President)
- REGINA KEAWE-PAAHANA (Treasurer)
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 2023. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To expose the community to technology and help them become more familiar with technology, through education, job training and hands on opportunities. To provide technology based services and facilitate the distribution of refurbished donated computers, hardware and other furnishing to other non profit organizations, low income families, homeless shelters and individuals, clean and sober living and prisoner re-entry programs. To manage online data management systems, digital data destruction and provide tech training for computer repairs and refurbishing. To operate an integrated service hub and public access facility that will include an internet cafe for the purpose of providing access to technology, tech and retail skills training.
What it reported doing in 2023
During 2023 several non profit organizations hired us to revamp their computer networks, phone systems and other technology. This generates revenue for us, it gives us the opportunity to provide real world hands on training to our volunteers, It enforces our reputation of being experts in technology and the ability to train our volunteers, and it assists other non profits in upgrading their technology and typically dropping their expenses by implementing newer technology and getting rid of the old stuff. In just ONE example, we helped another non profit organization save roughly $2,300 a MONTH by converting their offices to an upgraded computer network, installing fiber internet services - removing the old legacy DSL, and converting their phone system from a proprietary system over to an industry standard VoIP phone system. Once we completed our project with them, their new monthly expenses were only $425 a month for a system that is drastically better than what they had before. This helped the organization cut expenses and redirect that saved money to other projects that needed it.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 65
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 64
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 65.1%; rating input score 65
- Program expense ratio: 88%; rating input score 88
- 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: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 40.2%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.06; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 32.1% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 46.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 65.1% of revenue deployed · 88% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $165K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
- Consistency: 41 of 41 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.