Usf Health Professions Conferencing Corporation

Overview

Mission

The mission of usf health professions conferencing corporation (hpcc), a direct support organization and Florida not-for-profit corporation, is to support the university missions of academic excellence, (continued on schedule o)top-impact research, and beneficial community service, consistent with the goals of the university of south Florida and its board of trustees. Hpcc strives to achieve that support by creating and providing experiential learning that improves clinical skills and patient care in our community and around the globe with hands on training at its center for advanced medical learning and simulation as well as accredited didactic training online and at venues throughout the country.

What it reported doing in 2024

The organization provides students and healthcare professionals (physicians, nurses, physical therapists, social workers, psychologists, mental health professionals, and pharmacists) with high quality, affordable educational experiences that respond to their educational and professional needs and interests to maintain and enhance the knowledge, clinical skills, and practice behaviors required for excellence in patient care. During the year ended june 30, 2025, the organization provided continuing professional development to 49,356 participants.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
161765073
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Headquarters
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
8132247840
Rating
67
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 76
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 72
  • Sustainability: 48
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 84.1%; rating input score 84
  • Program expense ratio: 88.8%; rating input score 89
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Fail
    • 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: 5.3%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.12; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.7; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2.4%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -3.7% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -2% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -2.1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 84.1% of revenue deployed · 88.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 6 of 9 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $13.6M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $1.3M · 18 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $2.6M reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 16 annual filings from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • Related organizations: 11 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

Leadership & pay

18 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • CHARLES J LOCKWOOD MD MHCM (DIRECTOR): $1,322,797 total reported compensation
  • YASUHARU OKUDA (CEO, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $490,612 total reported compensation
  • MARK TAYLOR (DIRECTOR): $431,522 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: FY2024.