Water Is Life International Inc Schimpf

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
205951140
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2022
Forms available
Form 990 2022
Location
Orlando, FL, USA
Phone
4077164214
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Public Utilities

Reported finances

Revenue
$-417
Expenses
$385,067
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • DAVID HARDING (CHAIRMAN): $2,750 total reported compensation
  • MARY HARDING (SECRETARY): $2,750 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2022. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Enable people with the greatest need and the fewest resources to find affordable and sustainable access to safe water.

What it reported doing in 2022

In 2018, water is life changed strategies from installing conventional hand pumps that served approximately 500 people per unit to solar powered water systems that could serve thousands of people from one system. The cost of solar panels and pumps dropped significantly so that the average cost per person to provide safe drinking water was lower for solar systems compared to drilling a well and installing a hand pump. The basic concept is to pump water from the new well to elevated storage tanks using a solar- powered electric pump. From the collection tanks, water is distributed through buried plastic pipes to multiple water points with spigots where women and children can collect the clean water by just turning a tap. This eliminates the need for pumping and greatly reduces the time and energy that women and girls used to collect water daily from unprotected sources or very distant pumps. Since 2018, water is life has installed 15 solar systems at a cost of 700,582 which serves approximately 112,000 people in remote areas. In 2021, water is life installed three solar systems in the wando genet district in southern ethiopia at the invitation of the local government. All three projects including drilling a new well and outfitting it with a solar system. The wosha soyama project provided clean water to a school, clinic and community serving approximately 13,000 people at a cost of 39,960. The wotera gendo project is located in the highlands and includes the ergo school and community with approximately 9800 beneficiaries at a cost of 50,829. The yuwo project serves 11,175 people at a one-time cost of 55,727. These projects are life-changing for the community with a marked reduction in waterborne disease and increased time to do more productive things. In 2022, water is life international installed four solar-powered water systems in southern ethiopia. These projects served 6,510 beneficiaries in the wolicha boremo community near ziway and 42,660 beneficiaries in lalesa, edo gudino and alembada communities in west arsi. These projects are life-changing for the community, and particularly for the women and girls who are tasked with collecting water. A water spigot has replaced a hand pump which saves time for the women and girls to do more productive things. Their health will also improve with a significant reduction in waterborne diseases. These projects are the last to be implemented by water is life after completing more than 400 water projects since beginning operations in 2016. Water is life international is being dissolved but the work in ethiopia will continue with other partners.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 89% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 93% 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 65
  • Sustainability: 4
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98.1%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $46.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 75%; rating input score 75; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -92,442.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.4%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10.6% per year; rating input score 0; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -13.1% per year; rating input score 0; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 27th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 8 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $378K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $3K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2010 to 2022
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 1/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 21/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.