Maui United Way
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 990086524
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Wailuku, HI, USA
- Phone
- 808-244-8787
- Rating
- 83
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Federated Giving Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,762,927
- Expenses
- $5,928,647
- Assets
- $27,338,220
- Liabilities
- $1,212,098
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- JASON ECONOMOU (FORMER OFFICER): $52,500 total reported compensation
- NICHOLAS WINFREY (FORMER OFFICER): $41,120 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 unite people and resources to improve lives and strengthen communities across Maui, Molokai, and Lanai.
What it reported doing in 2024
Maui disaster relief, recovery, and resiliencen response to disasters, maui united way mobilized and administered large-scale disaster relief and recovery efforts across maui county. This includes grantmaking and direct fund distribution to individuals, families, and nonprofit organizations supporting immediate relief, long-term recovery, and resilience building.maui united way has distributed significant resources to local organizations providing housing support, food security, mental health services, case management, and community-based recovery programs. Funds are deployed with an emphasis on equity, prioritizing those most impacted and historically underserved.as a backbone organization, maui united way coordinates with government agencies, philanthropy, and nonprofit partners to ensure efficient, non-duplicative, and community-informed resource allocation. This work supports both immediate recovery needs and the long-term resilience of communities across maui, molokai, and lnai.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 71% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 52% for direct work, and 48% for grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 93
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 90
- Sustainability: 44
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 87.6%; rating input score 88
- Fundraising efficiency: $38.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th 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: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 36th 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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- 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: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -24.5%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 4.61; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 24.7% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 21.6% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 7 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 3 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 15 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $5.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $52K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 4 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 45 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 24 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 5/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.