Charlotte Chess Center Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 823566758
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2025–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2024
- Location
- Charlotte, NC, USA
- Phone
- 9802651156
- Rating
- 52
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Education N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $975,770
- Expenses
- $5,311
- Assets
- $970,459
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- WALTER HIGH (DIRECTOR)
- ANDREW HORTON (DIRECTOR)
- THOMAS KABASAKALIAN (TREASURER/DI)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Building a stronger chess community through education, opportunity, and pathways to excellence.
What it reported doing in 2025
Fundraising for the naroditsky memorial fund.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 11
- Transparency & Controls: 92
- Accountability: 76
- Sustainability: 96
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
- Program expense ratio: 2.8%; rating input score 3
- Fundraising efficiency: $205.99 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 91; 91st 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: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
- 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: 99.5%; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 182.73; rating input score 100; 100th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 2.8% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $150 in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 3/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.