Waikiki Business Improvement District Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 990351832
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Honolulu, HI, USA
- Phone
- 8089239243
- Rating
- 80
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,581,223
- Expenses
- $5,116,113
- Assets
- $2,480,502
- Liabilities
- $547,224
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
28 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- TREVOR ABARZUA (SEE SCHEDULE): $170,888 total reported compensation
- DAVID WILLARD (SEE SCHEDULE): $134,162 total reported compensation
- SUZANNE KIRIO (SEE SCHEDULE): $117,332 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 waikiki business improvement district association (wbida) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation formed pursuant to honolulu city ordinance number 00-40 for the purpose of implementing and managing the service programs designed to improve security, sanitation, and combat community deterioration in the waikiki area of honolulu. The wbida activities supplement the level of services provided to the area by the city and county of honolulu.
What it reported doing in 2024
The research and planning program conducts studies of public sidewalks, street usage and the homeless population in waikiki, as well as general research on waikiki indicators, and best practices utulizing data from other business improvement districts. The public improvements program which develops guidelines and action programs for systematic, integrated and ongoing district-wide improvements.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Membership-supported. 77% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 96% 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
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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 42
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 86.1%; rating input score 86
- Program expense ratio: 93.9%; rating input score 94
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 8.3%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.48; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.22; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 8.3%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.2% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 86.1% of revenue deployed · 93.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 21 of 21 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $4.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $171K · 28 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 3 contractors listed · $4.1M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 5 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 36/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.