Mississippi Association of Nurse Practitioners

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
464814174
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014, Form 990-N 2013
Location
Madison, MS, USA
Phone
6014073226
Rating
49
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Chambers of Commerce & Business Leagues

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$503,481
Expenses
$370,280
Assets
$775,528
Liabilities
$300

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • WANDA T STROUPE (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • TINA HIGHFILL (EXECUTIVE DI): $129,600 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The purpose of the association is to serve as the professional assocation for the nurse practitioners of the state of Mississippi, providing them with continuing education, meetings and events, advocacy, and representation on both state and national boards.

What it reported doing in 2025

The association actively promoted and communicated the value of advanced practice roles to support nurse practitioners and professional education. Public education initiatives were conducted at the state, regional and national levels to enhance awareness and understanding of the nurse practitioner role. An annual membership meeting was convened to provide critical organizational updates, facilitate information exchange, and strengthen member engagement. Through its dedicated website, regular newsletters, and a quarterly nurse practitioner magazine, the association continues to provide high-quality education, professional development and advocacy services to more than 8,000 nurse practitioners who live and work in Mississippi.

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

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: 79
  • Sustainability: 66
  • 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; 63rd 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: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 26.5%; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.09; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 35%; rating input score 5; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 20.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $130K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 10 of 11 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 5/100.