Alpha Epsilon Pi

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
136141078
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Phone
3178761913
Rating
77
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Sororities, Fraternities
Affiliation
Judaism

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$3,410,047
Expenses
$3,251,375
Assets
$6,110,532
Liabilities
$134,191

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

Leadership & pay

42 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ROB DERDIGER (CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ROB DERDIGER (CEO): $272,442 total reported compensation
  • JAY FELDMAN (SECRETARY): $214,964 total reported compensation
  • SHAYNA GOODMAN (ACCOUNTING DIRECTOR): $56,223 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To develop leadership, Jewish identity, and lifelong brotherhood among college men.

What it reported doing in 2024

Educational costs to assist undergraduate chapters in addressing problems of alcohol and drug abuse and other educational activities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 90% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The program-spending lines do not add up, so the filing cannot show reliably whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
  • 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. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 74
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 55
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.2%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 76.2%; rating input score 76
  • Fundraising efficiency: $5.9 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 1 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 12
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • 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%; rating input score 94; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 97.5%; rating input score 98; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.7%; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.88; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 8.8%; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 2.2% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7.6% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.8% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: Mission, programs, and operating context captured from the official website.
  • Where the money goes: 84.2% of revenue deployed · 76.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 39 of 40 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $2.5M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $272K · 42 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 13 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 7 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 21/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 50/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.