Alpha Chi of Pi Kappa Phi Housing

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
264167127
IRS 990 coverage
2014–2014
Forms available
Form 990 2014, Form 990-EZ 2013
Location
Miami, FL, USA
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Sororities, Fraternities

Reported finances

Revenue
$202,485
Expenses
$201,853
Assets
$5,530
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROBERT F RILEY (PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES E LEANO (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • ROBERT F RILEY (PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES E LEANO (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • DOMINIC A CASTILLEJO (TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2014. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Housing a College Fraternity

What it reported doing in 2014

Housing a College Fraternity at the University of Miami

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 39
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 99.7%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 0.3%; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.03; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 86; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 14.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 12.1% per year; rating input score 100; 74th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 99.7% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $202K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 42/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.