Capital Tea Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
843936551
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023
Location
Tallahassee, FL, USA
Phone
8509999553
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$192,581
Expenses
$183,126
Assets
$18,790
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • JANEL DIAZ (EXECUTIVE DI): $54,543 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Capital tea is trans-led 501(c)(3) nonprofit whose mission is to support and unify tlgbq+ people through education, advocacy, and empowerment; and to build an equitable future for our community.

What it reported doing in 2025

In 2023, the agency furthered the 2022 momentum from expansion to strengthen capacities serving the big bend area transgender communities. Strategically utilizing funds received to enhance operations and secure dedicated office spaces. With the spaces came the added community benefit of critically safe havens that function as supportive and welcoming environments for clients. Having a fixed and permanent physical location, with office spaces deepened community connections. Providing a place where bipoc tlgbqia+ program development and delivery is a key focus. Moreover, individuals feel empowered, safe, and supported while having ready access to resources, including job search assistance, rsum-building, or a refuge from daunting challenges. In 2024, there was a need to bolster development and implement a branch of direct support services embracing urgent needs. Accordingly, to alleviate immediate hardships; there was increased access to clothing, emergency financial assistance, and food. The efforts included ensuring those in crisis had access to essential housing instability support: rental assistance and emergency hotel stays (when needed).

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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

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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 89
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 35
  • Growth: 40

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 77.1%; rating input score 77
  • Program expense ratio: 81.1%; rating input score 81
  • Fundraising efficiency: $13.76 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 4.9%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 29.8%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -33.1% per year; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10% per year; rating input score 100; 69th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -48.1% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 77.1% of revenue deployed · 81.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 4 of 4 board members independent · 2 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $149K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $55K · 4 people listed
  • Consistency: 24 of 25 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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 — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 7/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 47/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 11/100.