Florida Classic Consortium Corporation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 510572825
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Tallahassee, FL, USA
- Phone
- 4074232476
- Rating
- 64
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $5,139,898
- Expenses
- $5,139,898
- Assets
- $1,701,831
- Liabilities
- $1,588,592
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
16 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- REGGIE THEUS (DIRECTOR): $530,775 total reported compensation
- W REBECCA BROWN (TREASURER/SECRETARY): $441,205 total reported compensation
- DR DONALD PALM (DIRECTOR SINCE 10/14/24): $422,900 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The primary purpose of the Florida classic consortium corporation is to organize, sponsor, manage, produce, promote and participate in the intercollegiate athletic football conference contest between Florida a&m university and bethune-cookman university; to solicit, raise, and otherwise receive funds from sponsors and the general public and to use, contribute, disperse and dispose of such funds for the above purposes and the intercollegiate athletic programs of the above-mentioned educational institutions.
What it reported doing in 2024
The Florida classic consists of the football game played between bethune-cookman university ("b-cu") and Florida a&m university ("famu") and related ancillary events. These events include the battle of the bands, kickoff luncheon, fan fest, and the night of distinction. The net proceeds from the football game and ancillary events are contributed to b-cu and famu.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 100% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 40% for direct work, and 60% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of voting board members are independent and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 68
- Accountability: 26
- Sustainability: 23
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 91.3%; rating input score 91
- Program expense ratio: 91.3%; rating input score 91
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 16.7%; rating input score 17; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 3 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- 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: 0%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.33; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.93; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 17.6% per year; rating input score 100; 86th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 91.3% of revenue deployed · 91.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 2 of 12 board members independent · 3 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $4.7M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $531K · 16 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $365K reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 6 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 4 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 — Accountability: Independent voting board scored 17/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 33/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 6/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 30/100.