Project Wet Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
200281441
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Bozeman, MT, USA
Phone
4065852236
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$711,201
Expenses
$760,732
Assets
$615,569
Liabilities
$208,143

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MONICA KILPATRICK (PRESIDENT)
  • SHANI COOKE (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • MORGAN CLOSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OPERATIONS)
  • JULIA BECK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PROGRAMS)

Highest reported compensation

  • MORGAN CLOSE (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, OPERATIONS): $121,424 total reported compensation
  • JULIA BECK (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PROGRAMS): $121,389 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The mission of the project wet foundation is to advance water education to understand global challenges and inspire local actions.

What it reported doing in 2025

At a time when water resources and critical infrastructure face many threats around the world, the project wet foundation inspires local action that supports water access and understanding of responsible water stewardship, encouraging a sustainable future. The project wet foundation works with partners in more than 80 countries and all 50 u.s. States and territories to deliver hands-on education about water. Through this network, the organization trains thousands of educators, corporate employees, parents, and community members, annually reaching and inspiring action by more than 2.5 million people.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 75% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 21
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 66.2%; rating input score 66
  • Fundraising efficiency: $1.32 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

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: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -7%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.81; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.34; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 31.9%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -9% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.7% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 66.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $503K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $121K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 16/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.