Water Wells for Africa

What it reported doing in 2024

Water wells for africa (wwfa) gives fresh, clean water to approximately 500 people each time we install a new water well. Because of the dependability of our equipment, some have remained in constant use since 1996. All of them last decades - with only the need for simple maintenance and (rarely) repairs. We know many of our pumps have already lasted more than 20 years. Before getting a well, each recipient community must learn and commit to basic maintenance.from an equipment perspective, each pump could technically serve more people (and many do), but we intentionally seek to keep numbers at sustainable levels to protect local water tables, ensure the longevity of both pumps and water supplies, and keep waiting lines shorter. Another important reason we keep the ratio of people-to-wells at about 500-to-1 is the fact that water is carried home in buckets, usually by girls and women. They must walk from home to the well, wait in line, and eventually return with a bucket of water balanced on their head (these weigh 8.3 pounds per gallon, equalling 40+ pounds per 5-gallon bucket). They usually do this multiple times per day. So, for example, if 50 people line up at the same well - and the filling process takes only two minutes each, the last person will have waited about an hour and 40 minutes before getting her single bucket of water. This is a very real and widespread problem, but one we and our donors are helping to remedy. Waiting in line for water creates a strain on local communities (opportunity costs) and exposes some of each community's most vulnerable people to weather, predators (animal and human), reduced schooltime, and physical hardship. More wells mean less waiting and more time for other activities such as work, education, gardening, etc. This is why we sometimes choose to place more wells within an area: we're investing in people and their health, much more than numbers.our planning process begins with a local, on-site needs assessment. Back in 2018, we made a clear decision as an organization: when necessary, we will place more "wells per person" because (quite simply) that is what will help them the most by bringing the greatest longterm relief and water stability to the greatest number of people. After all, wwfa exists to serve these people. Depending on a variety of factors, we may place additional wells on other nearby water sources so no single pump becomes overburdened or any water source depleted.the population of most malawian villages is in the hundreds rather than thousands of people, so we work with federal and regional governments, as well as local leaders, to maximize the impact of each well we install. Our systematic location selection process helps accomplish our "greatest number of people served over the long term" goal by placing new wells in locations easily accessible to multiple communities. The wwfa team have also become specialists at bringing water to people in the most remote and difficult areas. We help people in places where other water providers often avoid. We often (and literally) "go where others won't", and our wells are known to last so long that people sometimes relocate to be near them. This is a wonderful feeling.we usually will not install a well unless it will serve 50 or more families, and we strive for each well to meet the needs of at least 100 families. Average family size in malawi is five, so this means each well helps approximately 500 residents. When you include passing travellers, many wells serve more than 500.a new offering wwfa provides to local schools - and one we're proud of and excited about - is our blossom project. As we worked with schools in malawi to ensure water for students and staff, we realized that girls often missed school for a week or more during the time they menstruated. Unfortunately, there is a strong social stigma around menstruation, so they generally stay out of school rather than use the tiny thatched roof "bathroom" facility they share w

Financial Efficiency

• Mission deployment rate: 78%; rating input score 78
• Program expense ratio: 91.4%; rating input score 91
• Fundraising efficiency: $15.07 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 51; 51st 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: 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
• Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
  • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
  • Whistleblower policy: Pass
  • Document-retention policy: Pass
  • CEO compensation review process: Fail
  • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
  • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
  • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
  • Audit committee oversight: Missing
  • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

• Operating margin: 14.7%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
• Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.31; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
• Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.05; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
• Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

• Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
• Revenue growth: 13.4% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
• Asset growth: 8.6% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings