Agua Para La Vida

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
943122845
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2019
Location
Berkeley, CA, USA
Phone
5109141988
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$432,056
Expenses
$340,914
Assets
$277,271
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Charlie Huizenga (Executive Director)

People named in this filing

  • Charlie Huizenga (Executive Director)
  • Amy Luers (Director)
  • Joe Ramrath (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Mission: To help small, rural communities of Nicaragua develop and maintain access to safe drinking water. To preserve and protect the watersheds that provide water to these communities. To educate these communities about health and hygiene so that they achieve the full benefit from their safe drinking water. To provide training and education in all aspects of designing, building, and maintaining drinking water systems in order to achieve local autonomy in rural drinking water development

What it reported doing in 2024

Provided funding for rural community drinking water projects, health and hygiene education, watershed conservation and technical training

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 77
  • Transparency & Controls: 80
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 63
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 68.5%; rating input score 68
  • Program expense ratio: 85.2%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1,277.89 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 98; 98th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Pass
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 21.1%; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 12.7% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 68.5% of revenue deployed · 85.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $290K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 42 of 43 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.