National Association of Real Estate Brokers Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
366125210
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Lanham, MD, USA
Phone
3015529340
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$4,556,000
Expenses
$4,741,971
Assets
$761,362
Liabilities
$731,627

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

Leadership & pay

58 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DR COURTNEY JOHNSON-ROSE (PRESIDENT)
  • ASHLEY THOMAS III (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • DANNY FELTON (1ST VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • COURTNEY JONES (2ND VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • MARCUS BROWN (3RD VICE-PRESIDENT)
  • LYDIA POPE (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • C RENEE WILSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $150,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Nareb is an association of african american real estate professionals that participate in meaningful legal challenges and supports legislative initiatives that ensure the availability of fair and affordable housing for all americans

What it reported doing in 2024

National association of real estate brokers' (nareb) annual convention and mid-winter conference provided two major forums for professional development, research and the exchange of information among its members as well as the legislature and the general public for the purpose of preserving the right to equal housing opportunities. These forums also facilitated the exchange of information between the organization's leadership and is members.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% 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. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 68
  • Transparency & Controls: 71
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 20
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.3%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 63.7%; rating input score 64
  • Fundraising efficiency: $174.18 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 13th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 23%; rating input score 23; 13th 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; 63rd 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -4.1%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.96; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 3.2%; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 12.2% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 6.4% per year; rating input score 100; 42nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.3% of revenue deployed · 63.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 57 of 57 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $150K · 58 people listed
  • Consistency: 28 of 29 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 4/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.