Institute of Real Estate Management

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510204229
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Phone
4125630957
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Real Estate Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$74,359
Expenses
$70,238
Assets
$0
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Anthony D Williams (President)
  • Gary R Kowalczyk (President - Elect)
  • Mary Ann Sipos (Vice President - Education)
  • Mary J Scherer (Vice President - Legislati)
  • Michael Teresi (Vice President - Membershi)

People named in this filing

  • Anthony D Williams (President)
  • Gary R Kowalczyk (President - Elect)
  • Michael J Kempton (Secretary - Treasurer)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

(See comments under items 28, 29, and 30 below.

What it reported doing in 2015

Administrative expenses handle support functions and expenses for group and individual needs in keeping with goals and objectives established by National IREM headquarters. To encourage dissemination of current real estate and industry information affecting market conditions.

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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 96
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 94.5%; rating input score 94
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.5%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.9% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -15.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 94.5% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments · $70K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2010 to 2015
  • 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 1/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 57/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.