Hui Kauhale Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
990325011
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Honolulu, HI, USA
Phone
8085238826
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$985,757
Expenses
$576,053
Assets
$27,242,771
Liabilities
$307,235

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARIAN GUSHIKEN (PRESIDENT)
  • DAVE EGAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVE EGAN (VICE PRESIDENT): $302,676 total reported compensation
  • MARIAN GUSHIKEN (PRESIDENT): $254,362 total reported compensation
  • MARTHA MALLOE (SECRETARY/TREAS): $117,798 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The corporation shall perform the charitable functions of and carry out the charitable purposes of eah inc, a related California public benefit corporation, by being dedicated to promoting the development and preservation of decent housing that is affordable to very low, low, and moderate-income families in the state of Hawaii.

What it reported doing in 2024

The corporation serves as general partner in two limited partnerships with responsibility for organizing, developing and operating housing for low-income persons in Hawaii. The corporation is also the sole owner of eight limited liability companies and five c corporations which serve as the general partner in limited partnerships with responsibility for organizing, developing and operating housing for low-income persons in Hawaii. During the year, the corporation, as general partner or sole owner of the general partner of the various limited partnerships was responsible for the operation of over 500 units of low-income housing in various cities in Hawaii. During the year the corporation also, as sole owner of the general partner of the other two partnerships, performed predevelopment and development activities for single family and multi-family dwellings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 80% for direct work, and 20% for grants.

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: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 28
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 70.3%; rating input score 70
  • Program expense ratio: 96.6%; rating input score 97
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 41.6%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 47.29; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 24.3%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -9.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 70.3% of revenue deployed · 96.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $557K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $303K · 3 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 18 of 19 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 70 filed related-organization links
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.