Honolulu Zoological Society
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 237057714
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Honolulu, HI, USA
- Phone
- 8089263191
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Single Organization Support
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,411,141
- Expenses
- $1,124,716
- Assets
- $4,683,941
- Liabilities
- $58,590
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- MARY BENSON NON-VOTING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- THUY MARTINES (PRESIDENT)
- IVY TIMPE (VICE PRESIDENT)
- ALAN YAMAMOTO (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- MARY BENSON NON-VOTING (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $108,577 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To inspire stewardship of our living world by providing meaningful conversation education and experiences to our community. The zoo emphasizes pacific tropical ecosystems and our values of malama (caring) and ho'okipa (hospitality).
What it reported doing in 2024
In part, the mission of the society is as a fundraising support organization for the honolulu zoo. A portion of the monies received through fundraising go back to the zoo as direct cash support via the "zoo support program" that pays vendors directly for the work they complete on zoo/exhibit maintenance. It also pays for equipment, professional development, and other supplies not covered by the zoo's own budget provided by the city & county of honolulu. Any monies fundraised for the zoo and not disbursed as direct cash support to them are used to fund the in-kind support hzs provides to the zoo via education programs, volunteer management, membership, and conservation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 65% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 97% 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 most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 54
- Transparency & Controls: 81
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 72
- Growth: 20
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 49.9%; rating input score 50
- Program expense ratio: 73.4%; rating input score 73
- Fundraising efficiency: $5.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- 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: 20.3%; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.16; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -1.3% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 13.8% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 49.9% of revenue deployed · 73.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 12 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $826K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $109K · 17 people listed
- Consistency: 28 of 30 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grants require schedule f did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.