Oklahoma City Beautiful Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
730785200
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4055258822
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Environmental Beautification and Aesthetics

Reported finances

Revenue
$889,369
Expenses
$804,995
Assets
$585,200
Liabilities
$61,248

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

Leadership & pay

19 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Natalie Evans (Executive Director)
  • Lisa B Synar (Former Executive Director)
  • Marla Freeman (President)
  • David McCrary (Vice-President)
  • Ashley Howard (Past President)

Highest reported compensation

  • Natalie Evans (Executive Director): $67,000 total reported compensation
  • Lisa B Synar (Former Executive Director): $38,333 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

OKC Beautiful's mission is to lead beautification and environmental stewardship through collaboration, education and advocacy. We have been doing this for over 50 years through volunteers and contributing donors. This directly impacts the quality of life for our residents. We are focused on beautification, litter abatement, environmental education and sustainability.

What it reported doing in 2025

Beautification/ Sustainability Programs: Includes the planting of wildflowers in parks and highly traveled roadways; coordination of the Adopt-a-Spot Program volunteers; planning, planting and maintaining various public Landscape Projects as well as Tree OKC which focuses on expanding the tree canopy throughout the metro area through tree plantings.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Member-benefit provider. The nonprofit used 80% of its reported program spending for member benefits.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 86
  • Transparency & Controls: 67
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85%; rating input score 85
  • Program expense ratio: 93.2%; rating input score 93
  • Fundraising efficiency: $32.56 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 93.8%; rating input score 94; 25th 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 9.5%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.73; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 13.1%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 3.3% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 85% of revenue deployed · 93.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 18 of 18 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $750K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $67K · 19 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 28 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 5 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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.

  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 55/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.