Center for REALTOR Development Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364173556
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123298200
Rating confidence
Limited

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,050,993
Expenses
$13,474,274
Assets
$25,339,471
Liabilities
$3,511,920

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

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • NYKIA WRIGHT (PRESIDENT (AUGUST 2024))
  • KEVIN SEARS (BOARD MEMBER (NAR PRESIDENT) BEG 1/08/2024)
  • JENNIFER RZESZEWSKI (VICE PRESIDENT AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • NYKIA WRIGHT (PRESIDENT (AUGUST 2024)): $2,550,257 total reported compensation
  • MARC GOULD (SECRETARY / TREASURER): $566,924 total reported compensation
  • KEVIN SEARS (BOARD MEMBER (NAR PRESIDENT) BEG 1/08/2024): $357,216 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Center for REALTOR Development (CRD) is to promote the interest of members by creating and presenting educational programs; encouraging high standards through the creation/awarding of designations, certifications and degrees in real estate; and working with the NAR for the enactment of laws to advance interests of members.

What it reported doing in 2024

The Pricing Strategy Advisor (PSA) certification program is specifically designed to enhance skills in pricing properties, creating CMAs, working with appraisers, and guiding clients through the anxieties and misperceptions they often have about home values. In this course students will learn to select appropriate comparables and make accurate adjustments to them, for use in developing home price opinions. Real estate professionals of all experience levels will enhance their skills of guiding sellers and buyers through the details of Comparative Market Analysis and the underlying pricing principles that inform them and interact effectively with appraisers.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 91% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 55
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 4th 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: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -21.9%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.14; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.6%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 3.8% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.9% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $2.6M · 13 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.6M reported
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 19 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: CEO compensation review process not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 10/100.