WaterStone

Legal name: Waterstone Support Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
841430063
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Colorado Springs, CO, US
Phone
(719) 447-4620
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Philanthropy, Charity, Voluntarism Promotion

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$27,976,052
Expenses
$22,113,574
Assets
$191,359,297
Liabilities
$72,495,626

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KENNETH R HARRISON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER)
  • RICHARD VON GNECHTEN (VICE PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • KENNETH R HARRISON (CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER): $557,407 total reported compensation
  • RICHARD VON GNECHTEN (VICE PRESIDENT): $348,525 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS START (TREASURER): $304,344 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Honoring God through the transformational power of giving. Serving Givers at the intersection of faith and finance. Building the Kingdom by transforming assets into living water.

What it reported doing in 2024

The foundation is organized and is operated as a supporting organization for the support and furtherance of the religious, charitable, and educational tax-exempt purposes of christian community foundation (ccf) and national foundation inc. The foundation raises and distributes funds to various organizations qualifying under section 501(c)(3) and administers and supports a variety of charitable and educational projects and ministry charity projects in pursuit of its exempt purpose.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 65% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 70% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and most voting board members are independent. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 83
  • Transparency & Controls: 57
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.4%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 98.7%; rating input score 99
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 88.2%; rating input score 88; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 99.4%; rating input score 99; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: No; rating input score 0

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 21%; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.65; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0.5%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.5% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 90.4% of revenue deployed · 98.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $21.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $557K · 9 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $828K reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 34 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 13 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 29 filed related-organization links
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Related-party transparency scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.