Winston-salem Regional Association of Realtors Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
560841677
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Winstonsalem, NC, USA
Phone
3367685560
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,735,733
Expenses
$1,482,150
Assets
$7,502,984
Liabilities
$2,261,405

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

Leadership & pay

20 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALISON SINK (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • AMANDA HOBBS (EXECUTIVE DI): $144,446 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To be the leading resource for real estate professionals, to advocate for private property rights and to be an integral part of the community.

What it reported doing in 2025

Winston-salem regional multiple listing service provides participants with a means of making blanket unilateral offers of compensation to other participants; by which cooperation among participants is enhanced; by which information is accumulated and disseminated to enable authorized participants to prepare appraisals, analysis, and other valuations of real property for bonafide clients and customers; by which participants engaging in real estate appraisals contribute to common databases, and is a facility for the orderly correlation and dissemination of listing information so participants may better serve their clients and the public. Entitlement to compensation is determined by the cooperating broker's performance as procuring cause of the sale (or lease).

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 82% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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. A relatively small share of total spending goes to programs and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 62
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.8%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 51.2%; rating input score 51
  • Fundraising efficiency: $0.73 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 3; 3rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.6%; rating input score 65; 65th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.06; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 9.7%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.8% of revenue deployed · 51.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 20 of 20 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $758K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $144K · 20 people listed
  • Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
  • 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.

Key Signals

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

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 3/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 38/100.