Phi Kappa Building Association of Alpha Chi Rho Fraternity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
371108408
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Westmont, IL, USA
Rating
62
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Student Sororities, Fraternities

Reported finances

Revenue
$86,508
Expenses
$140,263
Assets
$759,280
Liabilities
$152,641

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KEVIN ANETSBERGER (PRESIDENT)
  • LINC HOBSON (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • KEVIN ANETSBERGER (PRESIDENT)
  • TOM FIFER (SECRETARY)
  • JACOB GAMBOA (TREASURER)

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 promote the welfare of the members of this association attendant upon a course of study in the university of Illinois, to provide and maintain a house wherein the members of this association may reside and hold meetings, and to promote the causes of civiv responsibility and to exemplify the trust ideals of responsible citizenship.

What it reported doing in 2024

Promote the welfare of the members of this association attendant upon a course of study in the university of Illinois, to provide and maintain a house wherein the members of this association may reside and hold meetings, and to promote the causes of civic responsibility and to exemplify the trust ideals of responsible citizenship.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

SUPPORTED - 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: 42
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 55.1%; rating input score 55
  • Program expense ratio: 34%; rating input score 34
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 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: -62.1%; rating input score 26; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.41; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -6.2% per year; rating input score 0; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -3.6% per year; rating input score 0; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 55.1% of revenue deployed · 34% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $48K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 16 of 16 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 34/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 26/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 15/100.