Renown Collective Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
813845305
IRS 990 coverage
2022–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2020, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Charlotte, NC, USA
Phone
7045640763
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Christianity
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$290,591
Expenses
$325,970
Assets
$52,151
Liabilities
$6,457

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES PATRICK MITCHELL (CHAIRMAN): $103,606 total reported compensation
  • CHAZ RIPLEY (SECRETARY): $17,391 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Renown collective is a network of social entrepreneur companies unified around a common objective: to bring hope to communities in africa and around the globe. Renown collective is a holistic strategy employed through diverse social initiatives. It is focused on creatively addressing and funding solutions to the global needs of clean water, education, healthcare, holistic spiritual care, orphans, micro-finance, and other issues which exist as obstacles for hope in the lives of people all around the world.

What it reported doing in 2024

Dirty water is a bully the african people have been fighting for centuries. The holistic effects are devastating. At renown collective, weve joined this fight by teaming up with the best african-led organizations who are committed to holistic and sustainable solutions. Together, we want to deal the final blow to this bully so the african people can experience the flourishing they were made for

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 75% for direct work, and 25% for grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and the filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 30
  • Sustainability: 16
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 90.1%; rating input score 90
  • Program expense ratio: 80.3%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: $38.54 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Fail
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Fail
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 94.9%; rating input score 95; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 33.3%; rating input score 33; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: -12.2%; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.16; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.12; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 37.1%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 13.3% per year; rating input score 100; 76th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 22% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.7% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 90.1% of revenue deployed · 80.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 1 of 3 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $262K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $104K · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 33/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 8 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 20/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 9/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.