Alpha Rho Alumni Association C/o Bill Norris

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202471391
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Phillipsburg, NJ, USA
Phone
2013232179
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alumni Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$298,097
Expenses
$315,925
Assets
$718,646
Liabilities
$320,877

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN HAYNES (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MATTHEW BELVERIO (SECRETARY)
  • KEVIN HAYNES (PRESIDENT)
  • EDWARD LANE (TRUSTEE/ASST)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Alpha rho's greatest resource is the quality of our brotherhood. Our efforts, especially as alumni, are to guarantee our young brothers enjoy the same high quality chi psi experience that has indelibly touched the 3,000 plus rutgersmen who were chi psis. These goals are central to our mission: -to teach young brothers those values that endure through all the vicissitudes of life; -to help them find themselves and make chi psi even more precious because of that intimacy the mind creates with the place it awakens in; -to make our brothers more aware of the finer things in life; -in these ethnically challenging times, to give our brothers something to believe in; -to leverage intangibles in chi psi teaching what they'll never learn in the classroom; -to convince them just how special they are, that they truly are the chosen ones; -to teach our brothers chi psi is a gift and the greatest gifts they will ever receive are their exalted friendships made at the lodge; and -to emphasize that be

What it reported doing in 2024

Providing a social and educational environment for student members of our organization.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 94% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.

The verdict

MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 41
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: -6%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.27; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 7.9% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 11 of 12 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 12/100.