Water For Our World

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
208359365
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2015
Forms available
Form 990 2015
Location
Phoenix, AZ, USA
Phone
6235219776
Rating
54
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
International Economic Development

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$40,436
Expenses
$53,402
Assets
$14,218
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Dan Spinogatti (President)
  • Allan Dunn (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Scott Foreman (Chairman): $10,590 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To provide Life, Love and Hope through water. We raise funds to help provide for global and local water needs, including the local homeless and homebound. Our Schools for Wells program goes into local school districts to raise awareness among future generations.

What it reported doing in 2015

Water For Our World 2015 Summary: Wet N Wild Water Drive 5th Annual yields an estimated 8000 water bottles for St. Marys Food BankWalk For the Thirsty held at Road Runner Sports raised awareness, dollars and collected both reusable water bottles and bottled water. We partnered with Salvation Army whose trucks were at the event to help collect and receive water.Water Drives continued throughout the summer with the help of local businesses, churches and schools. Over 10000 bottles were collected by local Boulder Creek High School to aid in this events mission of supplying water to the homeless and homebound. We once again worked with and the Heat Relief Network to meet the needs of homeless and homebound. This organization continues to grow and meet these needs. Partnered with CVS to create awareness in every drug store in Phoenix and Tucson area by providing information pamphlets at every pharmacy. We also were able to fund a truckload of water through this partnership along with several hundred insulated reusable water bottles.Celebrated our 8th year with our Marathon Team. We ran and provided resources to dig wells in Liberia. Our education piece allowed us to work with two schools in our Change For Change Program. These two schools helped raise funds for local and global needs. Global projects included additional wells in the Ebola stricken country of Liberia. We enjoyed a successful Water Pong event sponsored by a local Phoenix High School (Centennial HS). Funds raised went to support international water project.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 78% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 61% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

MIXED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 5
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 79%; rating input score 79
  • Fundraising efficiency: $8.15 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -32.1%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.27; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 19.8%; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -23.6% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -15.8% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -24.7% per year; rating input score 0; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 79% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $42K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $11K · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and foreign activity
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2011 to 2015
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.

  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 14/100.