South Central Accreditation Program

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
465104989
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2014–2015
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2015
Location
Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Phone
2252010993
Rating
88
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$49,761
Expenses
$58,421
Assets
$16,632
Liabilities
$1,087

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2015. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Carol Tingle (President)
  • Rhonda Finnie (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Carol Tingle (President)
  • Rhonda Finnie (Vice President)
  • Rita Finn (Treasurer)

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 2015. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

South Central Accreditation Program was organized by the State Nurses Associations of Arkansas and Louisiana for the purpose of providing registered nurses with continuing nursing education and for the approval of applications from providers of continuing nursing education programs within the respective states.

What it reported doing in 2015

South Central Accreditation Program was formed in 2014. The Program's website was maintained and updated providing direct access for both individuals and providers. During this continuing year 57 Individual Education Activities were held and 55 Provider Units were approved.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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. Expenses are high relative to revenue and total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 27
  • Growth: 80

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -17.4%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 20; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.07; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 57; 57th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 29.2% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -37.9% per year; rating input score 0; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $58K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2014 to 2015
  • 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.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 20/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 28/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 57/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.