Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
561757106
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2016
Forms available
Form 990 2016
Location
Elon, NC, USA
Rating
75
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Sororities, Fraternities

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$67,528
Expenses
$65,426
Assets
$3,571
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2016. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

13 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JACOB TEITLER (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • JACOB TEITLER (PRESIDENT)
  • JACOB BLOOM (TREASURER)
  • SCOTT DEFFLEY (INTERNAL VIC)

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 2016. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Lambda chi alpha is a brotherhood of gentleman committed to providing the best elon university fraternal experience through excellence in leadership, scholarship, and social opportunities. The fraternity strives to better the lives of others through community service, philanthropy, and dedication to the highest moral standards.

What it reported doing in 2016

Lambda chi alpha is a nationally well-known fraternity. It is an organization that is fraternal, social, and charitable. Activities include social mixers, dances, parties, fraternal activities, and charitable fundraising. Activities are ongoing and constant during the academic year of elon university. All members of lambda chi alpha, by and through its officers, conduct all activities listed above.

Operating model

Revenue model
Membership-supported. 73% of the money available for current operations came from membership dues.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 55% for direct work, and 45% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - 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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 79
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 96.9%; rating input score 97
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 87.5%; rating input score 88; 4th 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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.1%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.05; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -7.2% per year; rating input score 0; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.8% per year; rating input score 0; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 96.9% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 51 of 5 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $65K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 15 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 4 filing years from 2013 to 2016
  • 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: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 6/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.