Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity Delta Epsilon Chapter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
237258580
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2014
Location
Chattanooga, TN, USA
Phone
9017481868
Rating
42
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$284,143
Expenses
$292,401
Assets
$2,644
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Adam Hennessee (President (start Dec 24))
  • Jake Rogers (President (end Nov 24))
  • Marley Jean Pierre (External Vice President (start Dec 24))
  • Matthew Crabbe (External Vice President (end Nov 24))
  • Samuel Slaton (Internal Vice President (start Dec 24))
  • Adam Hennessee (Internal Vice President (end Nov 24))

People named in this filing

  • Adam Hennessee (President (start Dec 24))
  • Jake Rogers (President (end Nov 24))
  • Caleb Castle (Treasurer (start Dec 24))

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

The Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity (PIKE) is dedicated to developing men of integrity, intellect, high moral character, and to fostering a truly lifelong fraternal experience. PIKE is built on what are known as the four Pillars of Pike: Scholars, Leaders, Athletes, and Gentlemen.

What it reported doing in 2024

Program service revenue consists of Membership Dues and Assessments. Such program service revenue is primarily used for: Social Events/Gatherings, Member Education and Enrichment, Recruitment, and Community Service, along with coordinating Chapter member Occupancy obligations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 93% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
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

MIXED - 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: 83
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 34
  • 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: 88.9%; rating input score 89; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 79.8%; rating input score 80; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: -2.9%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.01; rating input score 2; 2nd 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: 9.2% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.1% per year; rating input score 100; 48th 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 · 18 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 12 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
  • 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.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 2/100.