Better Business Bureau of Central Oklahoma Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
730147260
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4052396081
Rating
65
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,124,221
Expenses
$2,271,420
Assets
$2,192,449
Liabilities
$545,016

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KITT LETCHER (PRESIDENT & CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • KITT LETCHER (PRESIDENT & CEO): $155,202 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Better Business Bureau of Central Oklahoma is a source of unbiased information for both consumers and businesses about the integrity and reliability of local businesses. BBB of Central Oklahoma has a service area of 54 counties, serving over 2 million residents and over 58,000

What it reported doing in 2024

BBB furnishes information concerning the reliability of business firms and pertinent information on charities by phone, in person, fax, and the internet to assist consumers in making informed pre-purchase decisions and whether or not to do business with companies or contribute to solicite charities. BBB serves as a conciliator in market place disputes for the purpose of helping resolve disputes (elimination the need for resolutions in court) and for the purpose of gathering information on companies for reporting to the public. BBB also develops file reports on business firms and charity solicitors through investigative advertising review and shopping.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 66
  • Accountability: 42
  • Sustainability: 28
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 81%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -6.9%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.97; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.25; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 6.3%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 5% per year; rating input score 100; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.3% of revenue deployed · 81% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 14 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $1.8M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $155K · 14 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 33 of 33 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 45/100.