Ka Mana O Na Helu

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
831789850
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2018
Location
Pearl City, HI, USA
Phone
8084296941
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Housing, Shelter N.E.C.

Reported finances

Revenue
$614,671
Expenses
$489,399
Assets
$3,159,659
Liabilities
$1,049,234

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SARAH YUAN (DIRECTOR/PRESIDENT)
  • ALISON HINAZUMI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • CARLOS PERARO (DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS): $124,550 total reported compensation
  • ALISON HINAZUMI (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $96,866 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Ka Mana O Na Helu (KMNH) is a nonprofit organization committed to developing effective leadership for the utilization of information technology to drive cost-effective human services solutions.

What it reported doing in 2024

Ka Mana O Na Helu (KMNH) is a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that provides database administration services in the human services sector. Led by Executive Director Alison Hinazumi, the KMNH team delivers a range of high-quality services to Continuums of Care, Government Agencies, Public and Private Companies, and Local Foundations working in the homeless and human services sectors. Specialized services provided by KMNH include: 1) Database Administration, 2) Human Services Corporate Training, 3) Custom Report Development, 4) Program Evaluation, 5) Grant Writing, and 6) Strategic Fiscal Consulting.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 83% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 86
  • Sustainability: 65
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 74.8%; rating input score 75
  • Program expense ratio: 87.4%; rating input score 87
  • 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 20.4%; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.46; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.33; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 45.2%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 16% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.4% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 74.8% of revenue deployed · 87.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $428K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $125K · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 23/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.