Safe Water Network
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510570455
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Phone
- 2123557233
- Rating
- 66
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $9,062,782
- Expenses
- $6,089,401
- Assets
- $16,324,439
- Liabilities
- $2,994,038
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- CHRISTOPHER W WILLIAMS PHD (CEO, SECRETARY & TREASURER)
- KURT SODERLUND (FORMER CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER W WILLIAMS PHD (CEO, SECRETARY & TREASURER): $329,875 total reported compensation
- RAVINDRA SEWAK (INDIA COUNTRY DIRECTOR): $247,645 total reported compensation
- CHARLES B NIMAKO (GHANA COUNTRY DIRECTOR): $205,562 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Safe water network envisions a world with healthy, thriving communities managing their supply of safe water. Our mission is to develop and scale-up innovative solutions, document best practices and build partnerships to reach millions with safe water globally.
What it reported doing in 2024
Safe water network's priority is to ensure communities have a supply of safe water that is sustainable and accessible to all. We support the scale-up of successful approaches through (i) field implementations in ghana and india that demonstrate and document viable approaches for rural and peri-urban communities; (ii) technical services that provide training, resources and capabilities to other organizations that collectively reach 10 million people with safe water; and (iii) sector engagement with the international water services ecosystem to establish best practices, share findings and advance conducive policies and funding for safe water supply in underserved communities world-wide.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 92% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 total spending goes to programs and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 68
- Transparency & Controls: 47
- Accountability: 84
- Sustainability: 68
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 57.8%; rating input score 58
- Program expense ratio: 85.6%; rating input score 86
- Fundraising efficiency: $21.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
- Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
- 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: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 32.8%; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.68; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 19.9%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 57.8% of revenue deployed · 85.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 7 of 8 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $5.2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $330K · 13 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 8 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.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 58/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 46/100.