National Panhellenic Conference Foundation Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
351960621
IRS 990 coverage
2011–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Carmel, IN, USA
Phone
3178723185
Rating
72
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Services, Organizations of Students

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$132,947
Expenses
$120,441
Assets
$2,217,645
Liabilities
$34,083

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

Leadership & pay

7 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • CAROLE JURENKO JONES (PRESIDENT)
  • DANI WEATHERFORD (CEO/SECRETARY)

People named in this filing

  • CAROLE JURENKO JONES (PRESIDENT)
  • ALICIA ADAMS (TREASURER)
  • CINDY JARBOE (TRUSTEE)

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

Through visibility and collaboration, the national panhellenic conference foundation will support national panhellenic conference priorities and initiatives to enhance the sorority experience.

What it reported doing in 2024

Established in 1995, the national panhellenic conference foundation's purpose is to support the initiatives of the national panhellenic conference. It accomplishes this through prudent investment and careful spending of the foundation's endowment as well as other board-restricted, restricted and unrestricted funds. Examples of how the npc foundation supports the conference's initiatives include the awarding of undergraduate and graduate scholarships; providing financial support for programs such as college panhellenic academy and the npc annual conference; and supporting the professional development of npc staff with grant support.

Operating model

Revenue model
Investment-supported. 68% of the money available for current operations came from recurring investment income.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 78
  • Transparency & Controls: 64
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 68
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95%; rating input score 95
  • Program expense ratio: 56.3%; rating input score 56
  • Fundraising efficiency: $17.87 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 97.6%; rating input score 98; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 9.4%; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 18.41; rating input score 94; 94th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.3% per year; rating input score 100; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -3% per year; rating input score 0; 14th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 49th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 95% of revenue deployed · 56.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 6 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $68K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 20 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2011 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 56/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 59/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 42/100.