Kai Loa Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
201632545
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Kaneohe, HI, USA
Phone
8082359175
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$659,637
Expenses
$730,939
Assets
$4,323,345
Liabilities
$2,217,862

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • IVY K KELLING (SEE SCHEDULE): $200,437 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 build na kula `o kamakau's success to advance and sustain the hawaiian language and culture.

What it reported doing in 2024

Project lama kukui. The goal of project lama kukui is to raise the health and well-being of the kamakau learning community to the highest possible level. The objectives of lama kukui are, 1) raise awareness and ability for the kamakau community to improve physical and mental health, 2) improve physical and mental health by supporting the guiding educational philosophy of the kamakau community through connections to land and place, 3) support guiding educational philosophy of the kamakau community by increasing the knowledge and skills of traditional practices which improve physical and mental health, 4) increase the capacity to serve the kamakau community and allow for the safe physical distancing of education delivery.

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 76% for direct work, and 24% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 68
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -10.8%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.91; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.51; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.8%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 91.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $668K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $200K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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.

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

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule D land buildings reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.