Brevard County Sheriff's Office Charity, Inc.

Legal name: Brevard County Sheriff's Office Charity

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593441257
IRS 990 coverage
2016–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2014
Location
Titusville, Florida, USA
Phone
(321) 505-8752
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Youth Centers, Clubs

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,353,126
Expenses
$948,905
Assets
$3,236,544
Liabilities
$24

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Scott Glover (President)
  • Lindsey Deaton (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Lindsey Deaton (Executive Director): $152,221 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To assist law enforcement officers and firefighters in their time of need by raising funds to support them when they face critical challenges such as medical emergencies, long-term illness, and line-of-duty deaths.

What it reported doing in 2025

To work with community leaders, businesses, and citizens to raise funds to help law enforcement officers and firefighters in their time of need by providing aid to distressed public safety officers or their families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 75% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 49% for direct work, and 51% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 71
  • Transparency & Controls: 73
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 73
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 62.2%; rating input score 62
  • Program expense ratio: 83.4%; rating input score 83
  • Fundraising efficiency: $89.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 83; 83rd percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 27th 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: 98%; rating input score 98; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: Fail
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 29.9%; rating input score 82; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.41; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16%; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 19% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 17% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.5% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 62.2% of revenue deployed · 83.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $791K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $152K · 6 people listed · 1 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 29 of 30 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 10 filing years from 2016 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 7 filed money-flow records
  • 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 22/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.