Beta Theta Pi-epsilon Lambda Chapter Umkc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
311410303
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2017
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2017
Location
Saint Joseph, MO, USA
Phone
8166654254
Rating confidence
Limited
Sector
Student Sororities, Fraternities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$79,720
Expenses
$81,612
Assets
$9,233
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

12 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ANDREW PETERSON (PRESIDENT)
  • JACOB GOWAN (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JOHN HICKMAN (HOUSING ADVISOR)
  • RYAN ECKERT (CHAPTER ADVISOR)
  • ANDREW PETERSON (PRESIDENT)

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

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2017. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Beta theta pi at the university of Missouri-Kansas city AIDS individuals in beta theta pi by promoting academic excellence, campus and community involvement, fraternal brotherhood, and personal fulfillment.

What it reported doing in 2017

Alumni social formal - every year the men of beta theta pi hold an annual alumni formal. Alumni, advisors, public officials, and staff of umkc are invited to attend the formal at crown plaza hotel. We honor the advisors that have helped us throughout the year and recognize distinguished alumni who have given up their time to help our fraternity grow. Additionally, we nominate a member of the umkc staff that has been a great asset to umkc students and give them an award. We also have dinner, transportation, and gifts for all who attend.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
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

- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: Limited
  • Program expense ratio: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -2.4%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.11; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 74; 74th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 4.4% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2012 to 2017
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.