Southern Production Program Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
720439567
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Oklahoma City, OK, USA
Phone
4055247774
Rating
34
Verdict
REVIEW
Rating confidence
Moderate

Reported finances

Revenue
$406,345
Expenses
$481,884
Assets
$3,262,535
Liabilities
$37,339

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MICHELLE TALERICO (PRESIDENT)

Highest reported compensation

  • STEVEN BOURLON (EXECUTIVE DI): $142,460 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To establish an association or league of publishers of newspapers and other published and printed matter to the end that the publishing industry might develop sound and economical production methods through acquainting members of the publishing industry with the developments and use of efficient equipment and production methods, and through cooperation with employees of publishers by assisting in their training and development by acquainting such employees with economical and efficient production methods and the use of new and improved methods and equipment, and the conduct of training programs for publishers and employees to the end that those engaged in the publishing industry shall have available to them, and to their employees, knowledge and information as to the most efficient and economical production methods.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization conducts in-house training seminars and provides on-site production training and consulting services for its members and their production staff relative to the care and maintenance of newspaper printing presses and other printing equipment.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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 - 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: 50
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 38
  • Growth: 20

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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: Scored; rating input score 0
  • 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: Fail
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Fail
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -18.6%; rating input score 15; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 6.77; rating input score 84; 84th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.6%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -2.4% per year; rating input score 0; 15th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 0% of revenue deployed · 0% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments
  • Leadership: top reported pay $142K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 13 of 14 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes foreign activity
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 15/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 44/100.