Oceanic Ascent Education & Athletics Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
660747234
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2022
Location
Hagatna, GU, USA
Phone
6717344721
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Education and Outdoor Survival Programs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,056,838
Expenses
$755,396
Assets
$5,103,910
Liabilities
$4,085,146

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Marlyn Oberiano (Vice President)
  • Michelle Crisostomo (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Marlyn Oberiano (Vice President): $100,242 total reported compensation
  • Michelle Crisostomo (President): $60,800 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The organization cultivates ideas and strategies of environmental sustainability within our local community through practical education, social engagement, and collaborative partnerships. The organization believes that environmental sustainability translates into the well-being of our island community.

What it reported doing in 2024

Regional Food Business Centers. Our organization received subaward funding from Hawaii Good Food Alliance, a USDA Regional Food Business Center grantee, to strengthen regional food system infrastructure across U.S. Pacific Territories. This grant supports critical improvements to processing facilities, cold storage, and distribution networks while providing technical assistance that enables local farms and food businesses to access new markets, enhance supply chain resilience, and reduce import dependence.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 41
  • Transparency & Controls: 86
  • Accountability: 74
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 39.6%; rating input score 40
  • Program expense ratio: 55.4%; rating input score 55
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 16th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 28.5%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.76; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.8; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 21.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.3% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 33.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 125.9% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 39.6% of revenue deployed · 55.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $418K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $100K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 40/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.