Pi Chi Omega

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
341160151
IRS 990 coverage
2019–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2018, Form 990-N 2016
Location
Fredericksburg, VA, USA
Phone
5403763617
Rating
38
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$132,728
Expenses
$85,375
Assets
$674,454
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • DESIREE STRAUBINGER (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES MILLER (PRESIDENT)
  • NANCY TROYANO (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • ANDREA CORON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • DESIREE STRAUBINGER (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • JAMES MILLER (PRESIDENT)
  • TOM MUELLER (SECRETARY)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To connect and enrich the urban pest management community, envisioning a collaborative environment in which technical knowledge is shared by engaged members, elevating the professionalism of the urban pest management community. (see schedule o)

What it reported doing in 2025

Pi chi omega is a national fraternity for pest control professionals. Initiated in 1950 by six student of dr. John v. Osmun at purdue university, the fraternity today is comprised of nearly 450 members representing 38 states and 4 foreign countries. The organization furters the science of pest control through meetings and education in the industry for member enrichment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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

REVIEW - 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 60
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 82
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Program expense ratio: 0%; rating input score 0
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 0%; rating input score 0; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 35.7%; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 7.9; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 9.6% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 9 of 11 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2019 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.