Pi Kappa Alpha Fraternity Delta Gamma Chapter

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
310653008
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2017, Form 990-N 2021
Location
Oxford, OH, USA
Phone
9017481868
Rating
45
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$460,671
Expenses
$456,327
Assets
$28,997
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Jack Terrell (President (start May 26))
  • Josh Balanoff (President (end April 26))
  • Keegan Kuhns (Internal Vice President (start May 26))
  • Matthew Mihalek (Internal Vice President (end April 26))
  • Sam Pece (External Vice President (start May 26))
  • Gabe Gardner (External Vice President (end April 26))

People named in this filing

  • Jack Terrell (President (start May 26))
  • Josh Balanoff (President (end April 26))
  • Keegan Kuhns (Internal Vice President (start May 26))

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

Pi Kappa Alpha is dedicated to developing men of integrity, intellect, and high moral character and to fostering a truly lifelong fraternal experience. Pi Kappa Alpha is built on four Pillars of Pike: Scholars, Leaders, Athletes, and Gentlemen.

What it reported doing in 2025

Program Service Revenue consists of Membership Dues and Assessments. Such membership dues and assessments are primarily used for: Social Events/Gatherings, Member Education and Enrichment, Recruitment, Community Service, and facilitating members' Occupancy obligations.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 100% 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: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 36
  • 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: 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: 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: 0.9%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.06; rating input score 5; 5th 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: -28.4% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 11.8% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 1 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 8 filing years from 2018 to 2025
  • 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.

  • 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 — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 5/100.