Kure Atoll Conservancy

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264011181
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Volcano, HI, USA
Phone
8008445000
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Reported finances

Revenue
$76,293
Expenses
$249,067
Assets
$379,958

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Matthew Saunter (President)

People named in this filing

  • Cynthia Vanderlip (Executive Dir.)
  • Matthew Saunter (President)
  • Christina Ryder (Trustee)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Kure Atoll Conservancy is a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting ongoing State of Hawaii habitat restoration and other wildlife management programs that enhance biological diversity ecosystem health, and cultural resources of Kure Atoll.

What it reported doing in 2025

State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources - Project will develop additional funding to support the habitat restoration, natural resource protection, pollution reduction, public outreach, and cultural studies.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87.6%; rating input score 88

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -226.5%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.53; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.1%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -35.6% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 25.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 2 filed program accomplishments · $218K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • 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.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.