WaterStone
Legal name: Hexagon Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 920520319
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2023–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2022
- Location
- Colorado Springs, CO, United States
- Phone
- (719) 447-4620
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $506,033,688
- Expenses
- $89,729,456
- Assets
- $522,903,234
- Liabilities
- $22,613,911
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TIM DUNN (PRESIDENT/ CHAIRMAN)
- RICK VON GNECHTER (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- KEN HARRISON (VICE CHAIRMAN): $561,065 total reported compensation
- RICK VON GNECHTER (VICE PRESIDENT): $348,525 total reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER START (TREASURER): $304,344 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Honoring God through the transformational power of giving. Serving Givers at the intersection of faith and finance. Building the Kingdom by transforming assets into living water. The following are copies of the most recent audit and the Federal Form 990s (Return of Organization Exempt From Income Tax) for Christian Community Foundation, dba WaterStone and for WaterStone Support Foundation. Audited Financials, WaterStone& Affiliates (Fiscal Year 2025) **Christian Community Foundation, dba WaterStone 990 (Fiscal Year 2025). WaterStone Support Foundation 990 (Fiscal Year 2025)** WaterStone is an accredited member of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA).
What it reported doing in 2024
The foundation is organized and operated to support christian community foundation dba waterstone and other public charities whose work furthers waterstone's purposes by receiving aand managing charitable contributions to support those ministries.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 91% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 100% of its reported program spending out as grants.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most filed governance safeguards are in place. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 43
- Transparency & Controls: 71
- Accountability: 61
- Sustainability: 94
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 18%; rating input score 18
- Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th 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: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 57.1%; rating input score 57; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- 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: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 82.3%; rating input score 99; 99th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.83; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0.1%; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 200% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 126.1% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 126.8% per year; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 18% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 4 of 7 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $89.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $561K · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $150K reported
- Consistency: 18 of 18 current checks pass
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 2 filing years from 2023 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 21 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 18/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 57/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.