Crew Charlotte Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562170925
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7049680609
Rating
43
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$476,634
Expenses
$438,368
Assets
$635,215
Liabilities
$78,675

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SHERRI COMMANDER (PRESIDENT EL)
  • VIRGINIA LUTHER (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • PATTY TREPP DRUMMOND (EXECUTIVE DI): $115,326 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To transform the commercial real estate industry by accelerating the advancement of women.

What it reported doing in 2025

The authentic leadership program guides professional women on an intensive journey of self-discovery, arming them with the tools to achieve their full leadership potential. Using gallups clifton strengths assessment, this dynamic program teaches participants how to understand and apply their strengths, develop their own authentic leadership styles, and refine their personal and professional visions. This unique program is specifically designed for transparent and honest leadership, featuring a targeted focus on clarity of the authentic self, conflict management and negotiation, coaching and mentoring, navigating workplace challenges and opportunities, leadership ability and knowledge, and personal change, courage, and resilience.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 84
  • Accountability: 63
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 81.3%; rating input score 81; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.45; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 26.3%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 1 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $115K · 15 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 14 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2013 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 2 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 13/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 20/100.