Mississippi Psychological Association
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 570897059
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2011–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Jackson, MS, USA
- Phone
- 6013727755
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $73,734
- Expenses
- $95,329
- Assets
- $75,532
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- AMANDA GUGLIANO (PAST PRESIDENT)
- LADARION AMMONS (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- NICHOLAS MCAFEE (PRESIDENT ELECT)
- TY STAFFORD (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- AMANDA GUGLIANO (PAST PRESIDENT)
- JENNIFER LADNER-GRAHAM (BOARD MEMBER)
- KRISTY MCRANEY (BOARD MEMBER)
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
To advance psychology as a science and as a profession by supporting the academic community and providing psychological knowledge to the general public.
What it reported doing in 2025
The Mississippi psychological association continues to be an approved provider for continuing education by the Mississippi psychological board of licensure.the convention was held in biloxi, ms. The professional development sessions were well attended with good evaluation responses. These opportunities allow psychologists to receive continuing education hours to continue their practice and licensure in Mississippi.in addition to the annual convention, mpa offered a continuing educational workshop regarding ethical practice issues affecting psychological practice.
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
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 82
- Sustainability: 29
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -29.3%; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.79; rating input score 42; 42nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 29.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.4% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 2 filed schedules
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2011 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 17/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 42/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.