Omega Psi Phi Fifth District
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 900652699
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023
- Location
- Nashville, TN, USA
- Rating
- 42
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Men's Service Clubs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $303,806
- Expenses
- $247,348
- Assets
- $317,361
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
5 people listed
People named in this filing
- Bryan White (District Representative)
- Richard Thompson (First Vice District Representative)
- Edward Vinsang (Keeper of Finance)
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
To develop, facilitate, and execute district-level Social Action programs, supporting local chapters in creating initiatives that uplift communities.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue comfortably covers expenses. 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: 6
- Transparency & Controls: 90
- Accountability: 30
- Sustainability: 65
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 5.7%; rating input score 6
- Program expense ratio: 6.9%; rating input score 7
- 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: 0%; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- 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: 18.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 43.7% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 83rd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 5.7% of revenue deployed · 6.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 12 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $17K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
- Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 6/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 7/100.
- High — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.