Imagine H2O Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261453882
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
San Francisco, CA, USA
Phone
4158286344
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Natural Resources Conservation and Protection

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,311,923
Expenses
$2,747,770
Assets
$3,367,886
Liabilities
$425,147

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Bryan (President)
  • Tamin Pechet (board president)

Highest reported compensation

  • Scott Bryan (President): $194,375 total reported compensation
  • Nimesh Modak (Program manager): $193,887 total reported compensation
  • John Curry (Finance Dir): $154,600 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Imagine h2o empowers people to deploy and develop innovation to solve water challenges globally. Through its programming, imagine h2o identifies and supports water innovators and startups demonstrating commercial viability and impact potential.

What it reported doing in 2024

Imagine h2o builds solutions with the worlds best water entrepreneurs to create change in four impact areas: tackling climate change, expanding access, advancing resource circularity and efficiency, and improving health. In 2024, our programs supported 42 global water entrepreneurs at the forefront of innovation in the context of the un development goal 6 - clean water and sanitation for all. We provided award funding to 11 water innovation projects in high-impact markets across ten countries. Our current cohort and alumni raised over $235 million in equity capital in 2024, and have raised more than $1.3 billion in total since the inception of imagine h2o. We have also introduced over 250 customers, mentors, and investors to the water entrepreneurs in our 2024 programs

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 69% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 78% for direct work, and 22% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. 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: 81
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 68.1%; rating input score 68
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 2nd 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 98.8%; rating input score 99; 47th 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: 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: -109.4%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.23; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 18.2% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 21.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 68.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $194K · 11 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 28 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 18 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

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 scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 49/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.