Paulding Putnam Electric Cooperative
Legal name: Paulding Putnam Electric Cooperative Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 344325955
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2025
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2025
- Location
- Paulding, OH, US
- Phone
- (800) 686-2357
- Rating
- 51
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $54,338,109
- Expenses
- $54,338,109
- Assets
- $163,640,497
- Liabilities
- $82,117,826
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Randy Price (President and CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- Randy Price (President and CEO): $342,122 total reported compensation
- Nicholas Eltzroth (COO): $235,401 total reported compensation
- Renee Hull (CFO): $196,656 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
As a not-for-profit, member-owned cooperative, we do things differently. We're bringing high-speed fiber internet to our same communities. 2 essential services, 1 trusted co-op building a brighter future. We don't just provide utilities – we power possibilities.
What it reported doing in 2025
Distribution of electrical energy to 14,272 consumers at 13,850 service points and the maintenance of approximately 1,725 miles of overhead and underground distribution lines.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating 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
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: 88
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 40
- 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; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- 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; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 0%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.01; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.5; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 3.3%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $54.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $342K · 17 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $14.7M reported
- Consistency: 24 of 44 current checks pass · 20 findings to review
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 17 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 — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Advertising column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX AllOtherExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX BenefitsToMembers column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX CompCurrentOfficersDirectors column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX ConferencesMeetings column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX DepreciationDepletion column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesAccounting column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesLegal column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX FeesForServicesManagement column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX InformationTechnology column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Insurance column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Interest column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Occupancy column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OfficeExpenses column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherEmployeeBenefits column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX OtherSalariesAndWages column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PayrollTaxes column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX PensionPlanContributions column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX Travel column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 39/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 41/100.