Tanzania Water Fund

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
260426302
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2024
Location
Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Phone
7405255259
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
International Relief

Reported finances

Revenue
$112,455
Expenses
$172,336
Assets
$116,694
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

2 people listed

People named in this filing

  • Justin Futrell (Director of Community Outreach)
  • Dean Riesen (Chairman)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Develop community water projects in the region of Singida, Tanzania. Drill deep water wells and surround the projects with education for kids and teaching farmers the benefits of irrigation. We also help to establish water councils with representation from both women and men in each village. This carries on in partnership with local governments.

What it reported doing in 2024

The village of Kinyeto has used additional funds to get running water into the medical clinic for the first time. They have also used access to water to have the tools to create concrete blocks which allows them to more easily build a maternity ward so that women don't have to walk home the day of giving birth. The community plot of land also is an example to show others visually the benefits of irrigation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filed totals do not add up and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 31
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 83.8%; rating input score 84

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -53.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.68; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 24.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.3% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 83.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $144K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.