36 Degrees North Co
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475435463
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2016
- Location
- Tulsa, OK, USA
- Phone
- 9188443550
- Rating
- 63
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Economic Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $4,195,828
- Expenses
- $3,182,220
- Assets
- $7,955,131
- Liabilities
- $3,528,947
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
25 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- THOMAS DEVON LANEY (PRESIDENT & CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- THOMAS DEVON LANEY (PRESIDENT & CEO): $239,021 total reported compensation
- JAMIE LEUPEN (SECRETARY): $94,302 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Education activities will include classes, workshops, and speakers for aspiring entrepreneurs in group and individual settings conducted by the organization's staff, representatives of partner organizations including Oklahoma state university and other academic institutions, and industry experts. Education activities will occur multiple times per week throughout the year and at various times of day in order to reach the broadest audience of potential entrepreneurs. Education activities will support aspiring entrepreneurs by developing expertise specific to a particular trade, interest, or experience not otherwise readily attainable.
What it reported doing in 2024
36 degrees north holds educational, networking, and mentoring programs for entrepreneurs and growing businesses. This includes classes, workshops, speakers, and one-on-one office hours with the organization's staff and community partners.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 48
- Transparency & Controls: 61
- Accountability: 86
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 48.5%; rating input score 48
- Program expense ratio: 62.6%; rating input score 63
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 1st percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 1 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 17
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 24.2%; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.5; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 10.5%; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 16.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 20.3% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 34.4% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 48.5% of revenue deployed · 62.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 24 of 20 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $239K · 25 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- 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.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 48/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Independent members within voting members did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 28/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.