Institute of Real Estate Management Boston Metropolitan Chapter No 4
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510203825
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025, Form 990-T 2020
- Location
- Scituate, MA, USA
- Phone
- 6174367565
- Rating
- 70
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Real Estate Associations
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $500,226
- Expenses
- $496,605
- Assets
- $462,170
- Liabilities
- $41,268
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- TONY SUSI (PRESIDENT)
- YOANY VARGAS (VICE PRESIDENT)
- KELLEY HANNON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
Highest reported compensation
- KELLEY HANNON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $160,354 total reported compensation
- CHRISTOPHER E MELLEN (EXECUTIVE COUNCILOR): $12,025 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 facilitate the development of technical and educational materials for the field of real estate management and organize and conduct educational opportunities for the profession and general public under the direction and supervision of the institute of real estate management.
What it reported doing in 2025
Various seminars and courses to provide members with updated education in the field of real estate management. Dinner meetings for members related directly to the organization's exempt purposes of providing members education in the field of real estate management. Services of the officers and various other members are donated in order to accomplish the organization's exempt functions and to administer its exempt activities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 89% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 32
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.1%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 67.7%; rating input score 68
- Fundraising efficiency: $0.08 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 27th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Fail
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0.7%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.93; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.09; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 34.7%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 66.1% of revenue deployed · 67.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 14 of 15 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $336K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $160K · 16 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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: Fundraising efficiency scored 2/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 36/100.