Singing Waters Ministries
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 760720133
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2010–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Richmond, VA, USA
- Phone
- 5199410929
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Christianity
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $7,132
- Expenses
- $7,165
- Assets
- $4,159
- Liabilities
- $33
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
3 people listed
People named in this filing
- Joanne Radke (Chariman)
- Peter Leishman (Secretary/Treasurer)
- Joyce Chadwick (Director, Operations)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Religious education Spiritual Prayer Ministry Worship services Produce & distribute religious material in all media forms Healing Conferences & training events Church visits
What it reported doing in 2025
Healing Encounters Ministry Schools Conferences Church visits
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 68% 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and program spending has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 34
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 39
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 33.8%; rating input score 34
- Program expense ratio: 33.6%; rating input score 34
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -0.5%; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.58; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 4.8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -10.7% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 33.8% of revenue deployed · 33.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
- Consistency: 9 of 9 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 41/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 35/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 26/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.