Clean Water for Malawi

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
274397710
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2013, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Jackson, MS, USA
Phone
6012061696
Rating
89
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$142,551
Expenses
$199,769
Assets
$35,808
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WYATT EMMERICH (PRESIDENT)
  • WILLIAM A MANDUCA END DATE 6301 (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • STANLEY KING START DATE 7116 (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • DELANEY CRAWLEY (BOARD MEMBER)
  • BILL BOYKIN (BOARD MEMBER)
  • PAM KING (BOARD MEMBER)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To drill and complete safe water wells that will provide clean water for the people of malawi in order to prevent them from becoming sick, and even dying, as a result of drinking contaminated water.

What it reported doing in 2016

Drilling and completing safe water wells that will provide clean water for the people of malawi.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 98% 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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and revenue has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 81.8%; rating input score 82

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: -40.1%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.18; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 22%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -17.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -13% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 81.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $163K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2012 to 2016
  • 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 17/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.