Global Water Center

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
845144926
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
North Charleston, SC, USA
Phone
8432437371
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,137,403
Expenses
$4,817,032
Assets
$4,313,210
Liabilities
$1,014,429

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

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • THOMAS JOHNSTON (CEO)
  • ERIC WEI (CARBON 4 SAFE WATER PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • THOMAS JOHNSTON (CEO): $189,414 total reported compensation
  • ERIC WEI (CARBON 4 SAFE WATER PRESIDENT): $161,456 total reported compensation
  • PAMELA CRANE-HOOVER (COO): $124,841 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Global water center (gwc) accelerates progress toward reliable access to safe water by strengthening the people and institutions responsible for rural water service delivery to the 1.3 billion people living in water poverty in those areas. Gwc convenes cross-sector partners, delivers standards-based training and ongoing technical support, and provides practical tools that help water systems stay operational. Since 2020, gwc has trained more than 4,000 water professionals across 118 countries and partnered with more than 40 organizations advancing the goal to end water poverty, save lives, and set up families and communities to thrive and flourish.

What it reported doing in 2024

Training and professional development for water professionals: the global water sector faces a shortage of more than 750,000 skilled water professionals, limiting the reliability and sustainability of safe water services. Gwc addresses this gap by delivering hands-on, practical training grounded in adult learning principles and reinforced through ongoing support. Training is designed to be embedded within institutional systems to support long-term change. This year, gwc delivered 10 online courses and eight in-person trainings focused on solar powered water systems design, operations, and maintenance. A total of 1,638 professionals completed online courses, and 318 professionals were trained in person. Across all courses, participants reported a 99 percent recommendation rate, reflecting the relevance and practical value of the training. Gwc's holistic approach supports professionals already working in the water sector and establishes clear pathways for new professionals to enter the field. This approach is demonstrated through the east africa capacity development program, a multi-year initiative to strengthen water sector capacity across tanzania, zanzibar, uganda, kenya, and ethiopia. The program began in tanzania, where gwc partnered with the national rural water agency to launch a multi-year training program. Building on this foundation, the program is expanding across the region. In zanzibar, gwc is launching vocational curriculum development aligned with national priorities, creating a formal pathway for new professionals to enter the water sector. Partnerships are advancing in uganda, ethiopia, and kenya. By equipping water professionals with practical skills and embedding training within institutions, this program supports long-term, scalable water services. Technical assistance and carbon-based financing for water system sustainability: approximately 40 percent of rural water systems fail within the first five years, often due to gaps in technical capacity, operations, and long-term financing. Gwc addresses these challenges by providing technical assistance and innovative financing support to improve water system sustainability. During the year, gwc's engineers and specialists supported infrastructure planning, engineering design, data analysis, remote monitoring, and solar powered water system implementation. Technical assistance was provided to 24 nonprofit organizations in 21 countries and four government ministries. This work was often delivered alongside training programs to reinforce applied learning and strengthen long-term system performance. This program also included carbon-based financing support through carbon 4 safe water and united carbon 4 safe water, enabling water projects to generate verified carbon credits and reinvest revenue into system operations and maintenance. Active engagements contributed to approximately 110,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in annualized outcomes. Gwc also launched the carbon aggregator platform in uganda with five initial developers, expanding access to carbon markets for smaller organizations. By strengthening both technical performance and financial sustainability, this program reduces system failure rates and supports long-term water service delivery.convening and partner alignment for scalable water sector solutions: water sector investments are often limited by fragmentation across governments, nonprofits, funders, and implementing organizations, and no single actor can address these challenges alone. Gwc addresses this reality by convening and aligning partners to coordinate efforts, share knowledge, and develop collaborative initiatives that respond to sector needs. This year, gwc convened leaders from more than 35 water sector organizations through the gathering: a water sector roundtable, creating space for shared learning, trust-building, and partnership development. Gwc also supported multi-stakeholder planning efforts in honduras, working with 24 organiz

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 87% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 99% 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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 78
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.1%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 82.5%; rating input score 82
  • Fundraising efficiency: $10.33 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings

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: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • 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; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 62.5%; rating input score 62; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: 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: -16.4%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.9; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -27.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -12.7% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.1% of revenue deployed · 82.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $189K · 12 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 36 of 36 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 39/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 8/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.