Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Living Water Project

The Living Water Project is an effort to fund clean and accessible water for people in impoverished areas of the world, thereby also extending to them the love of God.

$549k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
States reached
$93k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

International$852kReligion$401kHuman Services$374kEducation$46kPhilanthropy$43kHealth$20kEnvironment$20k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 6 grants below total $260,545 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $549,192 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $288,647 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $108k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $152k
$44,723
Median grant
States reached
$236k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Final Command Ministries$92,680
Zambia Mission Fund$59,500
Exile International$44,723
Invite Joy Burkino Faso$22,342
Water 4$21,300
Lipscomb University$20,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $419k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Living Water International: $12k → 8%Water4 Foundation: $110k → 16%Made in the Streets: $13k → 4%Water4 Foundation: $87k → 16%Water4 Foundation: $86k → 16%Water 4: $70k → 16%Water4 Foundation: $42k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Grants abroad, by region — $289k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$289k · 100% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: GSA Road Church of Christ - To construct 16 clean water wells in Liberia and provide access to clean water to approximately 6400 people, · Paul Partey - to fund the construction of 18 new clean water wells in Ghana and 12 well refurbishments to provide access to clean water to those in need. These projects serve approximately 12,000 people. · Water Access - To provide 4 new clean water wells in Malawi and 14 well refurbishments in order to provide clean water access to approximately 7,200.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 12% of Living Water Project’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 44% of the giving stays in TN; read by stated purpose it is 3% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Living Water Projectlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 88% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.7M · 7 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +46% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.

7 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$1.7M
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+16%

Still filing today

86%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesInternationalReligionOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as “new.” Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • FC
    FINAL COMMAND MINISTRIES
    6× · 2020–2025 · $677k · revenue +33%
  • WI
    WATER4 INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $416k · revenue +52%
  • ZC
    Zambia Christian College Inc dba Zambia Mission Fund
    6× · 2020–2025 · $320k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • MI
    MADE IN THE STREETS
    one grant, 2024 · $13k · revenue 0%
  • Living Water International
    one grant, 2022 · $12k · revenue +16%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Living Water Project

The Living Water Project is an effort to fund clean and accessible water for people in impoverished areas of the world, thereby also extending to them the love of God.

International
2
Empowering Lives International

Empowering Lives International (ELI) ignites world changers. We equip families and orphans to crush poverty, embrace Christ, and share their transformation with others through their God-honoring income, their deepening relationship with…

Religion
3
Charity Global Inc

Charity: water is a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe water to people around the world. continued on schedule o.

Human Services
4
Living Water World Missions

The mission is to share the good news of jesus christ by providing water purification systems in communities throughout the world. the current focus is the central american country of guatemala.

International
5
Second Nile Global Corp

Our commitment to providing accessible clean water extends beyond the boundaries of countries, continents, and cultures. We are driven by a shared belief in the power of technology to transform lives, uplift communities, and create a more…

International
6
Twin Missions International

Mission work

Health
7
Partnership for Indigenous Peoples -Pipes - International

We are a global Christian organization committed to partnering with indigenous peoples, local churches, and community-based organizations to make disciples of Jesus Christ and help end extreme poverty. We serve indigenous pygmies,…

International
8
Barnabas Leadership Ministries

Ministry

9
The Filter Project

The Filter Project is a parachurch ministry whose mission is to pour Gods love into under-resourced communities through the gift of safe, filtered, drinking water in Kenya and plan to serve into additional countries in the future.

International
10
Wash for Life Inc

To Provide clean water to communities in Malawi, Africa

Human Services
11
Serving Our Neighbor International

To share the love of Jesus and advance God's Kingdom by serving our neighbors with water and community development projects. Installing water filters in Tanzania, education and training on water, sanitation and, hygiene.

International
12
It is Well International Inc
Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Zambia Christian College Inc dba Zambia Mission Fund and the most unlike its peers is Final Command Ministries. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 9 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

FINAL COMMAND MINISTRIES — $677,180 · ReligionFINAL COMMAND MINISTRIESZambia Christian College Inc dba Zambia Mission Fund — $319,842 · InternationalZambia Christian College Inc …EXILE INTERNATIONAL INC — $101,219 · InternationalEXILE INTERNATIONAL INCOneWorld Health — $38,000 · InternationalOneWorld HealthWATER4 INC — $415,622 · Human ServicesWATER4 INC+2 more — $25,000 · Human Services+2 moreLIPSCOMB UNIVERSITY — $136,000 · OtherLIPSCOMB UN…INVITE JOY - BURKINA FASO INC — $43,384 · OtherINVITE JOY …
Religion$677,180International$459,061Human Services$440,622Other$179,384

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetFINAL COMMAND MINISTRIES — $677,180 over 6y, 11% of budgetWATER4 INC — $415,622 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetZambia Christian College Inc dba Zambia Mission Fund — $319,842 over 6y, 2.1% of budgetLIPSCOMB UNIVERSITY — $136,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetEXILE INTERNATIONAL INC — $101,219 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetOneWorld Health — $38,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetMADE IN THE STREETS — $13,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetLiving Water International — $12,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds FINAL COMMAND MINISTRIES
  • Who funds WATER4 INC
  • Who funds Zambia Christian College Inc dba Zambia Mission Fund
  • Who funds LIPSCOMB UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds EXILE INTERNATIONAL INC
  • Who funds OneWorld Health
  • Who funds MADE IN THE STREETS
  • Who funds Living Water International

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Servant FoundationKS14.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Servant Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Living Water Project funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending — grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12–24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 9 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph