Cooperative Baptist Fellowship of Florida Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
593104330
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
8138107499
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Protestant
Affiliation
Christianity

Reported finances

Revenue
$114,016
Expenses
$181,524
Assets
$1,523,876
Liabilities
$65,795

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

Leadership & pay

16 people listed

People named in this filing

  • YOLANDE AKINS (REPRESENTATIVE)
  • VICTOR CHESMORE (REPRESENTATIVE)
  • MARTHA CREEL (PAST MODERATOR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

Cooperative baptist fellowship supports its mission with the following eight goals: 1. Start new churches 2. Strengthen existing churches 3. Broaden and strengthen the financial base and support of cbf Florida 4. Grow cbf Florida membership 5. Review, evaluate and develop new mission opportunities for cooperative baptists 6. Implement a strategy to develop ministerial staff 7. Implement a strategy to develop lay leadership 8. Strengthen the organizational structure, administrative policies, procedures and financial systems

What it reported doing in 2024

Cooperative baptist fellowship of Florida provides program services to its constituent members (churches and individuals) that include, but are not limited to, (a) brokering mission engagement opportunities in south Florida and the caribbean, (b) training and materials to facilitate missional engagement, (c) enlistment, deployment, and support of church planters who develop new churches,(d) coordination of disaster response efforts of cbf churches and individuals,(e) provision of continuing education opportunities for clergy throughout the state of Florida,(f) support of local congregations in their search of pastoral staff,(g) provision of educational and informational materials on missions, spiritual formation, christian discipleship to constituents,(h) financial support for formal training of future clergy,(i) annual events to encourage, train, and inform constituency.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 70% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 87% of its reported program spending out as grants.

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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 98
  • Transparency & Controls: 88
  • Accountability: 88
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: $172.81 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92.8%; rating input score 93; 53rd 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 5 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 71
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -59.2%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 8.39; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -4.5% per year; rating input score 0; 18th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -4.1% per year; rating input score 0; 12th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 16 of 16 board members independent · 5 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $175K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 16 people listed
  • Consistency: 20 of 21 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 3 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.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 34/100.