Theta Chi at Drake University Helping Hand Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
455407781
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
Location
Davenport, IA, USA
Phone
2248289564
Rating
39
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Reported finances

Revenue
$80,610
Expenses
$68,975
Assets
$361,204
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Davis Heck (President)

People named in this filing

  • Davis Heck (President)
  • John Haben Jr (Treasurer)
  • John Riley (Director)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Aid, encouragement, promote and contribute to the education of members of theta chi fraternity at drake university, to promote scholarship, character, and morality.

What it reported doing in 2025

Grant to OX Building Corporation for operational expenses for Theta Chi Fraternity at Drake University. Supports the education achievements of ~30 members living in the house and ~75 total members.

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 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: 0
  • Transparency & Controls: 81
  • Sustainability: 70
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

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

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 76.9%; rating input score 77; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 14.4%; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.24; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -74.3% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 46.2% per year; rating input score 100; 96th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.9% per year; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 3 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 9 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
  • 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.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part III transfer expenses within program total did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.