DreamKey Partners Mortgage Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
562256392
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7043420933
Rating
60
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$32,610
Expenses
$14,753
Assets
$1,708,577
Liabilities
$1,777,762

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Mr Fred Dodson Jr (Vice President)
  • Ms Julie A Porter (President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Ms Julie A Porter (President): $381,585 total reported compensation
  • Mr Fred Dodson Jr (Vice President): $290,982 total reported compensation
  • Mr Kevin Schrader (Treasurer): $199,497 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To provide mortgage brokering and mortgage banking services to individuals and families directly and indirectly served by dreamkey partners, inc.

What it reported doing in 2024

Dreamkey partners mortgage, inc. Was organized to support and implement the programs and activities of dreamkey partners, inc., (the "parent") a North Carolina non-profit corporation, by providing mortgage brokering and mortgage banking services to individuals and families directly and indirectly served by dreamkey partners, inc. The organization provides pre-purchase education and preparation as well as down payment assistance to future eligible homebuyers in accordance with the terms and conditions of grants which fund specific activities related to homeownership.

Operating model

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

SUPPORTED - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of voting board members are independent.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 60
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 37
  • Sustainability: 71
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 48.5%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 9th 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: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 54.8%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 115.81; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 1.04; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 458%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.5% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -18.6% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 48.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 3 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $382K · 3 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 42 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
  • High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 5/100.