One Village Project

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813327685
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Kapaau, HI, USA
Phone
8052725267
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Land Resources Conservation

Reported finances

Revenue
$286,178
Expenses
$202,009
Assets
$113,991
Liabilities
$136

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Vanessa Stone (Co-Founder): $29,000 total reported compensation
  • Aliya Rosenbloom (Operations Director): $22,300 total reported compensation
  • Shauna Mistrestta (Visionary Development Director): $15,553 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O.

What it reported doing in 2025

Regenerative Agriculture Program Land Based Community Building: Our 20 acre ecological center in Hawaii is a visionary campus for transformational learning intergenerational village building and regenerative agriculture. One Village Project farm is a refuge for self inquiry natural living and personal growth . It is a place that practices devotion to community healing conflict resolution and cultural exchange. An agricultural campus for small enterprise and transformational education that is immersed in a landscape of life-giving soul-nourishing beauty.

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 97% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 67
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 61.9%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 85.4%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.2 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 81.8%; rating input score 82; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 29.4%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.56; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 33.1%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 37.7% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 34.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 61.9% of revenue deployed · 85.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 3 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $173K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $29K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 42 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 27/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 50/100.