The Center for Water Security and Cooperation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
474349539
IRS 990 coverage
2017–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
7817999780
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Water Resource, Wetlands Conservation and Management

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$135,215
Expenses
$428,566
Assets
$88,988
Liabilities
$1,605

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Luke Wilson (Chair and Deputy Director): $158,540 total reported compensation
  • Alexandra Campbell-Ferrari (Vice-Chair, Executive Dire): $158,540 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To advance water security by understanding, evaluating and innovating in water law and governance.

What it reported doing in 2024

The International Water Security Challenge (IWSC) program encompasses CWSC's work on setting legal benchmarks, assessing legal frameworks, and building legal and institutional frameworks for water security worldwide. This includes research on the impacts of law on the ability of water and wastewater systems to anticipate and manage the impacts of floods and droughts, realization of the human rights to water and sanitation and WASH standards in Africa, legal and service provision data collection, assessment of existing legal frameworks governing water resources and pollution control, and other means necessary to achieve water security. This program also houses our work with local and state leaders in the Mississippi River watershed to create a more collaborative, cohesive, and comprehensive management structure for the watershed. Also included in the IWSC are education and research initiatives that encourage deeper understanding of the rule of law in water security. Additionally included is coalition building in critical watersheds to inform and empower elected leaders to develop shared principles and shared framework for governing shared resources.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 94
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 51
  • Sustainability: 9
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 92.3%; rating input score 92
  • Fundraising efficiency: $40.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 60%; rating input score 60; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -217%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.21; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 74%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -6.8% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 92.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 3 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $396K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 5 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2017 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.