Rebuilding Together Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
521585880
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Washington, DC, USA
Phone
2025183100
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Home Improvement and Repairs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$11,511,606
Expenses
$16,259,988
Assets
$11,653,853
Liabilities
$2,726,052

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

Leadership & pay

33 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MAUREEN CARLSON (PRESIDENT CEO)
  • CAROLINE BLAKELEY (FORMER CEO PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • MAUREEN CARLSON (PRESIDENT CEO): $314,185 total reported compensation
  • CHRIS PERRY (CHIEF DEVELOPMENT OFFI): $226,161 total reported compensation
  • MAX GOUTTEBROZE (VP MARKETING COMMUN): $218,432 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Make essential repairs in partnership with our neighbors to support safe and healthy housing.

What it reported doing in 2024

Safe and healthy housing/affiliate relations - the organization brings volunteers and communities together to improve the homes and lives of low-income homeowners in need. The organization provides critical repairs, accessibility modifications, and energy efficient upgrades to low-income homes and community centers across the country. The affiliate services team serves affiliates by providing technical training, governance support, strategic planning, coaching, and the tools to improve affiliate leadership and operations. Management of the following programs and initiative fall under the affiliate service program: 1)training including expertise calls, webinars, new executive director orientation and safe and healthy housing training.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 56% for direct work, and 44% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 18
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 80.9%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $9.67 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 95.8%; rating input score 96; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • 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: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -41.2%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.72; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.23; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 3.7% per year; rating input score 100; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.2% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.9% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 23 of 24 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $13.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $314K · 33 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 32 of 33 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 81 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 76 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 37/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 25/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 54/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.