Water Council Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264222978
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Milwaukee, WI, USA
Phone
4149888750
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Marine Science and Oceanography

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,686,757
Expenses
$1,566,361
Assets
$1,520,361
Liabilities
$1,864,156

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DEAN AMHAUS (PRESIDENT & CEO (RETIRED))
  • KAREN FROST (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • KAREN FROST (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $175,737 total reported compensation
  • MATT HOWARD (INNOVATION FACILITATOR): $144,124 total reported compensation
  • DEAN AMHAUS (PRESIDENT & CEO (RETIRED)): $97,141 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To align the regional fresh water research community and water-related industries to establish the milwaukee 7 region as the global capital for fresh water research and education, through the advancement of scientific collaboration on fresh water research, the fostering of fresh water educational opportunities, outreach to the public on the advances in fresh water technology, and the promotion of a global understanding of fresh water culture.

What it reported doing in 2025

Scientific collaboration - for successful development of the water cluster, linkages must be developed between companies and universities. The water council is building these connections by developing communication links and systems that will enable technology transfers. The council is also working with local water-related companies and academic institutions to develop new applications for new and existing technologies, and create collaborative opportunities in water-related scientific and educational programs.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 81% 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 most voting board members are independent. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 95
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 87.8%; rating input score 88
  • Program expense ratio: 94.5%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $63.4 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 24th 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: 76.1%; rating input score 76; 37th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 7 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 88
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 7.1%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.23; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -1.1% per year; rating input score 0; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -0.7% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 87.8% of revenue deployed · 94.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 23 board members independent · 7 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $176K · 26 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Audit committee oversight not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.