Florida Debate Initiative

Legal name: Florida Debate Initiative Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
833600967
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2019
Location
Oviedo, FL, USA
Phone
4074536542
Rating
85
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Alliance/Advocacy Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$1,047,215
Expenses
$1,183,698
Assets
$1,126,030
Liabilities
$200,073

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

Leadership & pay

8 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ABRAHAM LOPEZ (PRESIDENT)
  • Beth Eskin (SENIOR ADVISOR TO PRESIDENT AND BOARD)

Highest reported compensation

  • ABRAHAM LOPEZ (PRESIDENT): $114,051 total reported compensation
  • Beth Eskin (SENIOR ADVISOR TO PRESIDENT AND BOARD): $21,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our goal is clear: to empower students with the skills and confidence they need to succeed, offering them invaluable educational, leadership, and professional opportunities that transcend the traditional classroom experience.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Florida Debate Initiative FDI incurs a range of administrative and program support expenses necessary to fulfil its mission. These expenditures are allowable and approved under the Department of Education grant and directly support FDIs mission to expand access to speech and debate education statewide. Program service costs include: Insurance office supplies postage dues and utilities required to maintain operations and communications. Audiovisual and communications materials used in statewide outreach training and tournament promotion. Professional consultants including Alumni Association Grants Management Development Programs Administrative Project Coordination Accounting Fiscal Officer Financial Audit and Public Relations who provide specialized expertise program delivery compliance financial oversight and stakeholder engagement. Senior Advisor and President services for program strategy partnership coordination and overall organizational leadership. These operational costs collectively ensure compliance with grant requirements support effective program management and sustain the delivery of high-quality debate and civics education opportunities across Florida.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 100% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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.

The verdict

STRONG - 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 92
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 24
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 94.6%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: Pass
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -13%; rating input score 10; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.95; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.18; rating input score 27; 27th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.4%; rating input score 33; 33rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 31.8% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 31.9% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 37.2% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 18 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 94.6% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $1.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $114K · 8 people listed
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 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: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 10/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 27/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 33/100.