Headwaters Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
262850223
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Whitesburg, KY, USA
Phone
6063352610
Rating
81
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$89,266
Expenses
$84,169
Assets
$108,802
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Justin Branham (Executive Director)
  • Courtney Rhoades Mullins (Board President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Deborah Sexton (Mtn Drinking Water Coordinator): $87,360 total reported compensation
  • Justin Branham (Executive Director): $62,400 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

In response to water-quality concerns, community members formed Headwaters in 2005 to promote local water resource management and encourage the stewardship of Letcher County waterways. Headwaters works with a variety of community members, local educators, elected leaders, researchers and academics to lead water sampling efforts and school and community environmental education.

What it reported doing in 2024

Because the three rivers, Kentucky, Cumberland, and Big Sandy, with headwaters in Letcher County continue to have frequent water quality violations, Headwaters' work to assist in determining causes and working toward solutions continues. One aspect of this work is through the continuation of our partnership on the Mountain Drinking Water Project (MDWP). This project is a collaboration between US Academic leads, Dr. Jason Unrine and Dr. Anna Hoover with the University of Kentucky (UK) and Headwaters' Research Coordinator, Deborah Sexton. As work on the project continues, the number of citizen scientists (CS) has expanded through the recruitment of additional local citizen scientists to collect water samples from their homes which are analyzed to help determine the causes of and solutions for problems related to disinfection byproducts. Sixteen CS have completed training administered by our research coordinator in the proper procedure to collect samples from their homes on designated days which were/are placed in coolers with ice packs, promptly collected from the homes by the research coordinator, and safely packaged on additional ice for overnight shipment to the UK lab for extraction. Required supplies are ordered and replenished by the research coordinator for each sampling. All CS are near the completion of their second year of sampling. All collected data will be used in analyses and reporting. A community report out is scheduled for November 2025. While there is on-going communication between the CS and the research coordinator, there is also regular correspondence and meetings among the academic leads, the research coordinator, and those completing the analyses at the UK lab to maintain and keep the lines of communication open and the project moving forward as designed. Citizen scientists have contact information for the academic leads as well. In addition, members of other community based organizations, the health sector, water utilities companies, and governing agencies on both the local and state levels continue their work on the Stakeholder Consultation Core to provide input, facilitate dialogue, and to assist in building trust in all partners involved. The collaboration among all those involved works toward a major goal of Headwaters: to assist in the solution(s) to bring clean, safe water to all.

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

STRONG - 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 68
  • Sustainability: 46
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.3%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • 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: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.7%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.29; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 177.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 5.7% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 27.7% per year; rating input score 100; 94th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.3% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $84K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $87K · 7 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 28/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.