Oklahoma Association of Electric Cooperatives

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN: 730556236
IRS 990 coverage: 2010–2024
Forms available: Form 990 2024
Location: Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone: 4054781455
Rating: 38
Verdict: REVIEW
Rating confidence: Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue: $7,719,251
Expenses: $7,667,085
Assets: $7,559,391
Liabilities: $1,538,603

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

Leadership & pay

72 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

Chris Meyers (Exec. VP/CEO)
Jennifer Meason (President)
Ron Pelanconi (Vice President)
Nicki Fuller (Exec VP/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

Chris Meyers (Exec. VP/CEO): $536,189 total reported compensation
Jim Reece (Director Legis & Regulatory Affairs): $249,280 total reported compensation
Anna Politano (Director PR & Comm): $230,867 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The Oklahoma Association of Electric Cooperatives is a statewide association created in 1942 and voluntarily supported by Oklahoma's non-profit electric cooperatives for the purpose to collectively perform services which would not be economical or practical for each individual cooperative to perform alone.Such services include a Safety & Loss Control program to train and certify electric cooperative linemen; a mutual aid disaster planning and coordination program; a self-insured workers compensation program to lower rates to its members; training programs for cooperative board members and managers, supervisors and employees; legislative and regulatory programs to ensure that the rights of electric cooperative member-consumers are fairly represented at state and national levels; and a monthly newspaper, Oklahoma Living, distributed to over 312,000 member-consumers to keep them informed of their energy and utility issues.

What it reported doing in 2024

Operating model

Revenue model: Earned-program. 90% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
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

REVIEW - 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: 60
Accountability: 79
Sustainability: 34
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: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

Operating margin: 0.7%; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.2; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
Officer compensation ratio: 24%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

Program expense growth: Limited
Revenue growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
Asset growth: 7.4% per year; rating input score 100; 47th percentile among comparable filings

Details

Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
Governance: 60 of 60 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment
Leadership: top reported pay $536K · 72 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
Consistency: 12 of 13 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
Contacts: How to reach this organization
Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 0/100.
High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 0/100.
High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 36/100.
Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 43/100.