Your donation attempt encountered a problem. Please refresh the page to try again.
You're faster than our page! Give the page a little longer to finish loading and try your donation again.
Saint Paul MN | IRS ruling year: 2009 | EIN: 26-4080644
Organization Mission
EOS EMPOWERS RURAL FAMILIES IN CENTRAL AMERICA WITH ACCESS TO SAFE DRINKING WATER AND OPPORTUNITIES TO GENERATE INCOME THROUGH SIMPLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS AND EDUCAT ... (More)
EOS EMPOWERS RURAL FAMILIES IN CENTRAL AMERICA WITH ACCESS TO SAFE DRINKING WATER AND OPPORTUNITIES TO GENERATE INCOME THROUGH SIMPLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS AND EDUCATION (Less)
Great
This charity's score is 100%, earning it a Four-Star rating. If this organization aligns with your passions and values, you can give with confidence.
This overall score is calculated from multiple beacon scores, weighted as follows: 33% Accountability & Finance, 50% Impact & Results, 8% Leadership & Adaptability, 10% Culture & Community. Learn more about our criteria and methodology.
We recognize that not all metrics and beacons equally predict a charity’s success. The percentage each beacon contributes to the organization’s overall rating depends on the number of beacons an organization has earned.
Use the tool below to select different beacons to see how the weighting shifts when only one, two, or three beacons are earned.
Charity Navigator's ratings previously did not consider Leadership & Adaptability, Culture & Community, or Impact & Results. The historic rating mainly reflects a version of today’s Accountability and Finance score. More information on our previous rating methodologies can be found on our rating methodology page.
Rating histories are available for a growing number of rated organizations. Check back later to see if this organization has a rating history!
Score
Most Recent Fiscal Year:
FY 2022
This beacon provides an assessment of a charity's financial health (financial efficiency, sustainability, and trustworthiness) and its commitment to governance practices and policies.
Learn more
Full Credit
Partial Credit
No CreditMajority Independent Board Members - 100% independent members8 out of 8 points Majority Independent Board Members - 100% independent members8 out of 8 points
Industry professionals strongly recommend an independent governing body to allow for full deliberation and diversity of thinking on governance and other organizational matters. We check to see that a majority of board members are identified as independent on their tax form.
Source: IRS Form 990
Independent Board Size - 14 independent members7 out of 7 points Independent Board Size - 14 independent members7 out of 7 points
Industry professionals strongly recommend an independent governing body to allow for full deliberation and diversity of thinking on governance and other organizational matters. For most organizations, we check to see if the organization has at least three independent board members. For large, donor-funded organizations, we check to see if the organization has at least five independent board members
Source: IRS Form 990
Financial Statements - Audit and Oversight Committee15 out of 15 points Financial Statements - Audit and Oversight Committee15 out of 15 points
An Audit, Review, or Compilation provides important information about financial accountability and accuracy. Organizations are scored based on their Total Revenue Amount:
| Total Revenue Amount | Expectation to Receive Credit |
| $2 million or higher and 40% or higher donor support | Expected to complete an audit and have an audit oversight committee |
| $1 million or higher | Expected to complete an audit |
| $500,000 - $1 million | Expected to complete an audit, review, or compilation |
| Less than $500,000 | No expectation (removed from scoring methodology) |
Source: IRS Form 990
Material Diversion of Assets - None10 out of 10 points Material Diversion of Assets - None10 out of 10 points
A diversion of assets — any unauthorized conversion or use of the organization's assets other than for the organization's authorized purposes, including but not limited to embezzlement or theft — also can seriously call into question a charity's financial integrity. We review the charity's most recent IRS Form 990 to see if the charity has reported any diversion of assets.
Source: IRS Form 990
Full CreditPartial CreditNo CreditWebsite Listed on Tax Form - Listed2 out of 2 points Website Listed on Tax Form - Listed2 out of 2 points
Charity Navigator looks for a website on the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency metric.
Nonprofits act in the public trust and reporting publicly on activities is an important component.
Source: IRS Form 990
Conflict of Interest Policy - Listed4 out of 4 points Conflict of Interest Policy - Listed4 out of 4 points
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a conflict of interest policy on the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy protects the organization and by extension those it serves, when it is considering entering into a transaction that may benefit the private interest of an officer, director and/or key employee of the organization.
Source: IRS Form 990
Whistleblower Policy - Listed4 out of 4 points Whistleblower Policy - Listed4 out of 4 points
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a whistleblower policy per the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy outlines procedures for handling employee complaints, as well as a confidential way for employees to report financial or other types of mismanagement.
Source: IRS Form 990
Document Retention and Destruction - Listed4 out of 4 points Document Retention and Destruction - Listed4 out of 4 points
Charity Navigator looks for the existence of a document retention and destruction policy per the IRS Form 990 as an accountability and transparency measure.
This policy establishes guidelines for the handling, backing up, archiving and destruction of documents. These guidelines foster good record keeping procedures that promote data integrity.
Source: IRS Form 990
Documents Board Meeting Minutes - Yes2 out of 2 points Documents Board Meeting Minutes - Yes2 out of 2 points
Charity Navigator looks to confirm on the IRS Form 990 that the organization has this process in place as an accountability and transparency measure.
An official record of the events that take place during a board meeting ensures that a contemporaneous document exists for future reference.
Source: IRS Form 990
Full CreditPartial CreditNo CreditTax Form Posted on Nonprofit's Website - Listed4 out of 4 points Tax Form Posted on Nonprofit's Website - Listed4 out of 4 points
For almost all charities, we check the charity's IRS Form 990 to see if it discloses that the Form 990 is available on the charity's website. As with the audited financial statement, donors need easy access to this financial report to help determine if the organization is managing its financial resources well.
Source: IRS Form 990
Full CreditPartial CreditNo CreditLiabilities to Assets: Ratio - 18.14%15 out of 15 points Liabilities to Assets: Ratio - 18.14%15 out of 15 points
The Liabilities to Assets Ratio is determined by Total Liabilities divided by Total Assets (most recent IRS Form 990). This ratio is an indicator of an organization's solvency and/or long-term sustainability.
Source: IRS Form 990
Program Expense: Ratio - 82.91%25 out of 25 points Program Expense: Ratio - 82.91%25 out of 25 points
The Program Expense Ratio is determined by Program Expenses divided by Total Expense (average of most recent three IRS Forms 990). This measure reflects the percent of its total expenses a charity spends on the programs and services it exists to deliver.
Source: IRS Form 990
This chart displays the trend of revenue and expenses over the past several years for this organization, as reported on their IRS Form 990.
Presented here are up to five of this organization's highest compensated employees. This compensation data includes salary, cash bonuses, and expense accounts and is displayed exactly how it is reported to the IRS. The amounts do not include nontaxable benefits, deferred compensation, or other amounts not reported on Form W-2. In some cases, these amounts may include compensation from related organizations. Read the IRS policies for compensation reporting
Wesley Meier, President & Director
$90,000
Lucy Jodlowska, Board Chair & Director
Compensation not entered
Frank Bergh, Secretary & Director
Compensation not entered
Katie Frank, Treasurer & Director
Compensation not entered
Greg Mcgrath, Vice President & Director
Compensation not entered
Source: IRS Form 990 (page 7), filing year 2022
Below are some key data points from the Exempt Organization IRS Business Master File (BMF) for this organization. Learn more about the BMF on the IRS website
Foundation Status:
Organization which receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or the general public 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) (BMF foundation code: 15)
Affiliation:
Independent - the organization is an independent organization or an independent auxiliary (i.e., not affiliated with a National, Regional, or Geographic grouping of organizations). (BMF affiliation code: 3)
The Form 990 is a document that nonprofit organizations file with the IRS annually. We leverage finance and accountability data from it to form Encompass ratings. Click here to search for this organization's Forms 990 on the IRS website (if any are available). Simply enter the organization's name (Eos International Nfp) or EIN (264080644) in the 'Search Term' field.
Score
This beacon estimates the actual impact a charity has on the lives of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of donor resources to achieve that impact.
Learn more
Program
Circuit Rider, Post-Construction Support for Rural Communities
Activities
The nonprofit distributes water purification systems to beneficiaries.
Program Type
Water Purification
Beneficiaries Served
People of Latin American descent, General public, Women
Program Geography
We operate in 1,900 rural communities across Central America.
Time Period of Data
1/1/22 to 12/31/22
Outcomes: Changes in the lives of those served by a nonprofit. They can be caused by the nonprofit.
Costs: The money spent by a nonprofit and its partners and beneficiaries.
Impact: Outcome caused by a nonprofit relative to its cost.
Cost-effectiveness: A judgment as to whether the cost was a good use of resources to cause the outcome.
Outcome Metric
A year of clean water provided to a person
Outcome Data Source
Ratings are based on data the nonprofit itself collects on its work. We use the most recent year with sufficient data. Typically, this data allows us to calculate direct changes in participants' lives, such as increased income.
Output data collected during the program. The nonprofit submitted data on how many purifiers it distributes and how many people a purifier serves, which we use to calculate how many person-years of clean water a nonprofit provides.
Method for Attributing Outcomes
We don't know if the observed changes were caused by the nonprofit's program or something else happening at the same time (e.g., a participant got a raise). To determine causation, we take the outcomes we observe and subtract an estimate of the outcomes that would have happened even without the program (i.e., counterfactual outcomes).
We estimate the number of person-years of clean water the nonprofit provides by comparing the person-years actually achieved to the person-years that would have been achieved even in the absence of the nonprofit (the “counterfactual”). Some beneficiaries might have accessed clean water from other providers or on their own; these counterfactual successes must be netted out of the successes we observe. Otherwise, we would be attributing a change in a person’s life (gaining clean water) to the nonprofit when it would have happened anyway. Few nonprofits estimate the counterfactual themselves, so we construct our own counterfactual estimate based on research and publicly available data. We research the average rate with which clean water access is increasing year over year in that location, and assume that, if the nonprofit had not intervened, that trend would have continued.
Cost Data Source
After estimating the program's outcomes, we need to determine how much it cost to achieve those outcomes. All monetary costs are counted, whether they are borne by a nonprofit service deliverer or by the nonprofit’s public and private partners.
Program cost data reported by the nonprofit. Partner and beneficiary costs reported by the nonprofit or estimated by Charity Navigator.
Cost Calculation
$549,291 program costs + $0 partner costs + $17,911 beneficiary costs = $567,202 total costs [2021 USD]
We calculate impact, defined as the change in outcomes attributable to a program divided by the cost to achieve those outcomes.
Impact Calculation
$567,202 total costs / 915,990 person-years of clean water = roughly $0.62 provides clean water to a person for a year. [2021 USD]
Benchmark for Rating
Impact & Results scores of water purification programs are based on a WHO estimate of the value of clean drinking water access in developing regions. Programs receive an Impact & Results score of 100 if they provide a person-year of clean water at a cost of less than 75% of the estimated value of water access, and a score of 80 if they do so for less than 125% of the value. If a nonprofit reports impact but doesn't meet the benchmark for cost-effectiveness, it earns a score of 65.
Determination
Highly cost-effective
Score
This beacon provides an assessment of the organization's culture and connectedness to the community it serves.
Learn more
Full CreditPartial CreditNo CreditConstituent Feedback - Data Available100/100 points Constituent Feedback - Data Available100/100 points
30% of beacon score
This organization reported that it is collecting feedback from the constituents and/or communities it serves. The methodology leveraged for Constituent Feedback is based on The Core Principles of Constituent Feedback, which describes listening and responding well to feedback. Charity Navigator participates in a consortium with other feedback experts and leading nonprofit infrastructure platforms to drive Constituent Feedback's advancement, promotion, and data collection.
How is your organization using feedback from the people you serve?
To identify and remedy poor client service experiences, To identify bright spots and enhance positive service experiences, To make fundamental changes to our programs and/or operations, To inform the development of new programs/projects, To identify where we are less inclusive or equitable across demographic groups, To strengthen relationships with the people we serve
What challenges does your organization face in collecting feedback from the people you serve?
The people we serve tell us they find data collection burdensome, It is difficult to find the ongoing funding to support feedback collection, Staff find it hard to prioritize feedback collection and review due to lack of time
Equity Practices - Data Available100/100 points Equity Practices - Data Available100/100 points
70% of beacon score
This organization's score of 100 is a passing score. The organization reported that it is implementing 14 Equity Practices.
This assessment demonstrates the importance of implementing practices that contribute positively to an organization's overall culture, both internally and with respect to community engagement. Furthermore, equity centered frameworks and similar approaches have drawn much attention from donors, experts, and sector leaders who underscore its value to the nonprofit's overall health and capacity for mission success. Currently, the Equity Strategies Checklist assessment consists of practices and policies that promote racial equity in their operations and programs (per the Equity Strategies checklist administered by Candid). As we refine our DEI assessment, Charity Navigator partners with DEI consultants and field experts to broaden and deepen this work.
| Equity Practices (7/7) | |
We review compensation data across the organization (and by staff levels) to identify disparities by race. | |
We ask team members to identify racial disparities in their programs and/or portfolios. | |
We analyze disaggregated data and root causes of race disparities that impact the organization/'s programs, portfolios, and the populations served. | |
We disaggregate data to adjust programming goals to keep pace with changing needs of the communities we support. | |
We employ non-traditional ways of gathering feedback on programs and trainings, which may include interviews, roundtables, and external reviews with/by community stakeholders. | |
We disaggregate data by demographics, including race, in every policy and program measured | |
We have long-term strategic plans and measurable goals for creating a culture such that one’s race identity has no influence on how they fare within the organization. | |
| Equity Policies and Procedures (7/7) | |
We use a vetting process to identify vendors and partners that share our commitment to race equity. | |
We have a promotion process that anticipates and mitigates implicit and explicit biases about people of color serving in leadership positions. | |
We seek individuals from various race backgrounds for board and executive director/CEO positions within our organization. | |
We have community representation at the board level, either on the board itself or through a community advisory board. | |
We help senior leadership understand how to be inclusive leaders with learning approaches that emphasize reflection, iteration, and adaptability. | |
We measure and then disaggregate job satisfaction and retention data by race, function, level, and/or team. | |
We engage everyone, from the board to staff levels of the organization, in race equity work and ensure that individuals understand their roles in creating culture such that one’s race identity has no influence on how they fare within the organization. | |
Score
This beacon provides an assessment of the organization's leadership capacity, strategic thinking and planning, and ability to innovate or respond to changes in constituent demand/need or other relevant social and economic conditions to achieve the organization's mission.
Learn more
Full CreditPartial CreditNo CreditMission 10/10 points Mission 10/10 points
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking through articulating the organization's mission
EOS EMPOWERS RURAL FAMILIES IN CENTRAL AMERICA WITH ACCESS TO SAFE DRINKING WATER AND OPPORTUNITIES TO GENERATE INCOME THROUGH SIMPLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS AND EDUCATION
Vision 10/10 points Vision 10/10 points
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking through articulating the organization’s vision.
A Central America where communities are healthier, free from poverty, and thriving
Source: Nonprofit submitted responses
Goals 20/20 points Goals 20/20 points
The nonprofit organization presents evidence of strategic thinking and goal setting through sharing their most important strategic goals.
Goal One: Strategy 1: Implement the Circuit Rider Model Provide post-construction support to rural communities through our Circuit Rider model
Goal Type: New program(s) based on observed changes in needs among our constituencies/communities served.
Goal Two: Strategy 2: Transition Water Quality Monitoring Community leaders will take over the monthly water quality monitoring activities
Goal Type: Grow, expand, scale or increase access to the existing programs and services.
Goal Three: Strategy 3: Scale the Circuit Rider Model – Reach 2 Million people by 2025 As communities demonstrate self-sufficiency, EOS will transition into new districts
Goal Type: Grow, expand, scale or increase access to the existing programs and services.
Leadership Development 15/15 points Leadership Development 15/15 points
The nonprofit provides evidence of investment in leadership development
Describe an investment in leadership
EOS has investing in leadership training courses to help built up their confidence and leadership abilities.
Mobilizing for Mission 15/15 points Mobilizing for Mission 15/15 points
The nonprofit provides evidence of leadership through focusing externally and mobilizing resources for the mission.
This organization mobilizes for mission in the following ways:
Strategic Partnerships
Networks of Collective Impact Efforts
Thought Leadership
Raising Awareness
Community Building
Policy Advocacy
What are this organization’s external mobilizaton efforts?
Our organization thrives on collaboration with partners, beneficiaries, and governmental institutions. We are members of several WASH-related networks, and do our part to share out best practices. We proactively seek partnerships with other organizations to learn and implement high-quality programs.
Adaptability Story 30/30 points Adaptability Story 30/30 points
The nonprofit has an opportunity to tell the story of how the organization adapted to tremendous external changes in the last year.
This past year, our organization has adapted to the pandemic by adjusting our programs meet the current public health needs by providing more education regarding the spread of the coronavirus and hygiene.
Impact & Results
Accountability & Finance
Culture & Community
Leadership & Adaptability
The Giving Basket is having some issues. If you wish to donate, please refresh the page. If the problem persists contact us.
Cart ID: Not Assigned
The Giving Basket is having some issues. If you wish to donate, please refresh the page. If the problem persists contact us.
Cart ID: Not Assigned
