Blood: Water

Legal name: Bloodwater Mission Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562483082
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Nashville, TN, United States
Phone
615-550-4296
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution
Affiliation
Religious (unspecified)

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,020,361
Expenses
$2,329,164
Assets
$1,020,618
Liabilities
$43,094

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JAKE SMITH (Executive Dir.): $136,884 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Blood: Water is an international nonprofit that partners with African community-driven organizations to end water and HIV/AIDS health disparities through organizational strengthening and financial support. Our Values. Therefore, we commit ourselves to the common life required of this kind of work. We forsake the temptation to autonomy that is deep within the human heart, and promise to submit ourselves with honest humility to the virtues necessary for us to accomplish our mission. For 2,000 years the Church has ordered its life by justice, temperance, courage, prudence—and faith, hope, and love. Together, they form the heart of the good life, giving us contours for holiness as well as happiness. We will flourish as individuals and as an organization to the extent that we make these our ends. As staff and board members of Blood: Water, it is with gladness and singleness of heart that we...

What it reported doing in 2024

Bloodwater mission, inc. (the organization) is a not-for-profit organization registered in nashville, Tennessee that operates an international nonprofit that partners with african community-driven organizations to end water and HIV/AIDS health disparities through organizational strengthening and financial support. The organization also has a branch office in nairobi, kenya.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 99% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 60% for direct work, and 40% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 62
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 23
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.7%; rating input score 87
  • Program expense ratio: 75.1%; rating input score 75
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.68 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Pass
    • Conducts site visits: Pass
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 6th 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: -15.3%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.44; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.9%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 86.7% of revenue deployed · 75.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $1.7M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $137K · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 20/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 9/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 15/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 48/100.