Kahala Nui Senior Living Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
814851343
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2017
Location
Honolulu, HI, USA
Phone
8082187000
Rating
68
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Senior Citizens' Housing/Retirement Communities

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,387,873
Expenses
$1,401,093
Assets
$13,123,676
Liabilities
$1,763,976

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CRAIG R COURTS (PRESIDENT/CEO)
  • AUDREY MORABITO (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO)
  • MARIA KINSLER (VICE PRESIDENT & COO)

Highest reported compensation

  • CRAIG R COURTS (PRESIDENT/CEO): $618,915 total reported compensation
  • AUDREY MORABITO (VICE PRESIDENT & CFO): $335,699 total reported compensation
  • MARIA KINSLER (VICE PRESIDENT & COO): $297,693 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Kahala nui senior living foundation is a part of the kahala nui community of nonprofit organizations. The kahala nui community includes (a) kahala nui senior living, inc., the parent company; (b) kahala senior living community, inc., which owns and operates a continuing care retirement community, and (c) live well, which provides adult daycare services. The foundation conducts fundraising activities and accepts gifts and contributions on behalf of the kahala nui community. Funds are used primarily to make grants to or on behalf of the kahala nui community.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation conducts fundraising activities and accepts gifts and contributions on behalf of the kahala nui community: kahala nui senior living, kahala senior living community, and live well. Funds are used primarily to make grants to or on behalf of the kahala nui community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Affiliate-supported. 94% of the money available for current operations came from contributions from related organizations.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.

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 some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 36
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 9.5%; rating input score 10
  • Program expense ratio: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.4%; rating input score 93; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 89.5%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 9.37; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 15.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.2% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 52.7% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 52.4% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 9.5% of revenue deployed · 90.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $619K · 12 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 22 of 23 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 9 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 11 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.