Institute of Real Estate Management Georgia Chapter 67

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
510221202
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Atlanta, GA, USA
Phone
7705909995
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$300,303
Expenses
$275,768
Assets
$199,213
Liabilities
$55,902

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

Leadership & pay

26 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRIDGET RAY CPM (President)
  • JOSEPH LEHMUTH CPM AMO (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

Highest reported compensation

  • DEBORAH WESTPHAL CPM ARMIAE (Executive Dir.): $163,768 total reported compensation
  • WENDY MOZA CPM (VP EDUCATION): $10,560 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Offering meaningful experiences through education, partnerships and networking in the real estate industry.

What it reported doing in 2025

Serving real estate professionals who manage ALL REAL ESTATE propertytypes, The Institute of Real Estate Management Organization, IREM has beenan integral force in the State of Georgia, since 1970. We are dedicated todelivering leading-edge networking and educational offerings for everystage of your career, evolving with you to provide lifelong professionaldevelopment opportunities.

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 available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 72
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 82
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 78.2%; rating input score 78
  • Program expense ratio: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 96%; rating input score 96; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 8.2%; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.28; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 63.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.9% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.8% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 78.2% of revenue deployed · 85% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 25 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $164K · 26 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 23 of 23 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 53/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 33/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 13/100.