Alliance for Water Efficiency
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 300416781
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2012–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Chicago, IL, USA
- Phone
- 7733605100
- Rating
- 75
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $1,705,378
- Expenses
- $1,408,367
- Assets
- $1,433,312
- Liabilities
- $277,434
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Ron Burke (President & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Ron Burke (President & CEO): $178,178 total reported compensation
- Jeffrey Hughes (Director of Finance & Operations): $131,131 total reported compensation
- Kelly Connelly Kern (Director of Public Affairs): $116,896 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE) promotes the efficient and sustainable use of water. Efficiency leaves water in our rivers, lakes, and aquifers to support healthy watersheds and sustain wildlife habitats. Our Members AWE’s extensive network of over 500 organizational members brings together stakeholders committed to this shared purpose, including municipalities, industry leaders, government agencies, non-profits, researchers, and more. Whether you are working to advance water efficiency in your industry, community, or region, we provide your organization the resources you need to achieve your goals and more effectively steward your water resources.
What it reported doing in 2025
We are building stronger, more resilient communities, businesses, and ecosystems alongside our members and partners.Our Sustainable Water Vision for 2030 envisions a world where water is properly valued in every form and proactively, efficiently, and sustainably managed throughout its entire cyclefrom the water provider to the tap and back into our waterways.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 71
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 49
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 78.4%; rating input score 78
- Fundraising efficiency: $64.62 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 64th 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: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 17.4%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.02; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.19; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 30.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 4% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 2 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 66% of revenue deployed · 78.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $178K · 21 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2012 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 43/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.