Run For Fitness
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 272972550
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Kula, HI, USA
- Phone
- 8082714057
- Rating
- 44
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $70,227
- Expenses
- $79,170
- Assets
- $6,136
- Liabilities
- $685
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Jon Emerson (President)
- Malia Crouse (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- Jon Emerson (President)
- Arelene Emerson (Secretary/Treasurer)
- Malia Crouse (Vice President)
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
To educate the public regarding health and fitness by promoting youth sports and recreation programs. To provide financial assistance to Hawaii schools and nonprofits.
What it reported doing in 2025
Ran the Maui 5K event that had 1,196 total participants and raised $47,901 for the benefit of 47 local Maui schools/nonprofits.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 70% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. 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: 0
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 24
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -12.7%; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.08; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.11; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -22.9% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 13% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 27/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 14/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.