Rebuilding Together of Greater Charlotte

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
273101212
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
9802369079
Rating
80
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Home Improvement and Repairs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,472,603
Expenses
$2,131,643
Assets
$1,770,831
Liabilities
$305,874

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

Leadership & pay

15 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Beth Morrison-North (Executive Dir.): $111,988 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of Rebuilding Together of Greater Charlotte is repairing homes, revitalizing communities, rebuilding lives.We mobilize community volunteers and contractors to provide repairs that make homes safer and healthier for lowincomehomeowners.

What it reported doing in 2024

Critical Home Repair & Neighborhood Revitalization: This program provides critical home repairs and accessibility modifications to help low-income homeowners live in safe and healthy homes. RTGC repaired 45 homes, addressing safety hazards and essential repairs such as roofing, HVAC systems, plumbing, and accessibility improvements like ramps and grab bars. In addition to individual home repairs, RTGC worked on neighborhood revitalization through collaborative partnerships and neighborhood improvement projects, including community beautification efforts and enhancements to shared spaces. RTGC also expanded its service area to include five counties: Mecklenburg, Cabarrus, Iredell, Gaston, and Union, increasing its impact and ability to serve more families and communities in need.

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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 66
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 53
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 64.3%; rating input score 64
  • Program expense ratio: 74.5%; rating input score 74
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.97 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 49; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 13.8%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.17; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 5.3%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 21.4% per year; rating input score 100; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27.4% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 30.7% per year; rating input score 100; 93rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 64.3% of revenue deployed · 74.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $112K · 15 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $128K reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 49/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 52/100.