Malama Kula

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
934177423
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Kula, HI, USA
Phone
8082643005
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community, Neighborhood Development

Reported finances

Revenue
$303,970
Expenses
$180,640
Assets
$123,441
Liabilities
$111

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEBORAH FORD (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KYLE ELLISON (TREASURER/CE): $64,007 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to foster community, provide service and support, safeguard our residents against natural disaster, and empower, educate, inform, and nurture the town and residents of kula. Our website is a great representation of what we do for the kula community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Other program activities include the following: kupuna curbside green waste pickup over 25% of kula is over the age of 60, and they either don't have access to a truck, or no longer have the physical strength that's required to fire-harden their homes. In an effort to help our resident kupuna, malama kula provides regular curbside green waste pickup. Kula community work days malama kula hosts regular community work days in kula, which give volunteers the chance to give back and serve our kula community. From caretaking properties that were damaged in the fire, to removing invasive species of weeds and replanting with native plants, these events provide a hands on opportunity to help our residents and neighbors. Kula fire detection cameras were committed to keeping our community safe, which is why we installed kulas first ai-enabled, fire detection cameras, which will issue alerts to mfd whenever smoke is detected. Kula curbside recycling free, weekly curbside recycling for hi-5 beverage containers infrastructure advocacy overhead utility lines; our aging, inadequate water supply; long delays in repairing our roads. Were here to advocate for our kula community in addressingand advancingour need for better infrastructure. Air, soil, and human health testing in response to damage from the kula fire, malama kula is helping provide funding for independent analysis of air, soil, and human health samples for residents near the affected burn zone. Kula community events malama kula hosts regular community events such as our mana'o on the mountain neighborhood potluck and speaker series, as a way of building community resilience and educating our neighbors about kula.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of total spending goes to programs. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 58
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 52.2%; rating input score 52
  • Program expense ratio: 87.7%; rating input score 88
  • Fundraising efficiency: $59.75 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 75%; rating input score 75; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 40.6%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 52.2% of revenue deployed · 87.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 4 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $158K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $64K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 24 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 52/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 57/100.