Okla Theater Preservation Society

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
993881656
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Mcalester, OK, USA
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Fund Raising and Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$16,516
Expenses
$25,208
Assets
$41,441
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

3 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Donna Parham (President)
  • Jared Sutmiller (President)

People named in this filing

  • Donna Parham (President)
  • Jared Sutmiller (President)
  • Leigh Ann Robertus (Sec Treas)

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

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

Overview

Mission

Our purpose is to restore and preserve the historic Okla Theatre, a cherished landmark that holds deep cultural and historical significance for our town. Through this restoration, we aim to honor our communitys heritage, foster local pride, and revitalize a space that can once a

What it reported doing in 2025

Our purpose is to restore and preserve the historic Okla Theatre, a cherished landmark that holds deep cultural and historical significance for our town. Through this restoration, we aim to honor our communitys heritage, foster local pride, and revitalize a space that can once again serve as a vibrant hub for arts, culture, and connection.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 36
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 86.8%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.96 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings

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: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -52.6%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.64; rating input score 34; 34th 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 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 175.8% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -102.9% per year; rating input score 0; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -19% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 86.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $22K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 3 people listed
  • Consistency: 14 of 14 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 38/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 25/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.