Miami Dade Urban Debate League
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 475182053
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2016–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025
- Location
- Miami, FL, USA
- Phone
- 7865662399
- Rating
- 52
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Educational Services and Schools - Other
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $73,359
- Expenses
- $108,663
- Assets
- $84,753
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
13 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BEN MITCHEL (Vice President)
People named in this filing
- OSVALDO GARCIA (Director)
- BRIANNA H SAINTE (Chairman)
- M DALE REED (Director)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To significantly improve the academic achievement of economically-disadvantaged students by building, supporting and sustaining a competitive debate program in urban public and charter middle and high schools in the miami-dade county, Florida area and the surrounding south Florida counties by providing debate workshops, tournaments and year-round debate opportunities.
What it reported doing in 2025
Services to individuals - mdudl provides services to middle school and high school students who participate in competitive debate programs sponsored by mdudl in public and charter middle schools and high schools that serve economically-disadvantaged students in the miami-dade county area.mdudl hosts debate workshops and tournaments for students participating in mdul's debate program and will facilitate year-round debate opportunities by assisting mdudl students that desire to attend tournaments hosted by other school districts in the miami-dade county area. Mdudl may also pay entry pees to third-party debate tournaments in the miami-dade county area for students participating in its debate program that would like to compete in these third-party debate tournaments. Additionally, mdudl intends to provide stipends to the high school and middle school teachers that serve as debate coaches during the first two years of the partner school's debate program, after whic hthe mdudl-provided stipend will be phased out at such schhol. Mddudl will also pay for the meals and prizes and may pay for transportation expenss incurred in connection with each tournament and the printed materials needed by students in order to prepare for the tournaments.services to organizations - mdudl providdes services to the middle schools and high schools that agreee to partner with mdudl in its efforts to provide competitive debate programs in public and charter middle schools and high schools serving economically-disadvantaged students in the miami-dade county area. Mdudl hosts workshops to educate the teachers serving as debate coaches on how to be better coaches for their students. Mdudl also hosts student workshops and debate camps to educate students on how to be better debaters. Mdudl will pay for the meals and prizes and may pay for transportation expenses incurred in connection with each tournament and the printed materials needed by students in order to prepare for the tournaments.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
- 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
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and revenue has grown recently. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 17
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 19
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 19.6%; rating input score 20
- Program expense ratio: 13.2%; rating input score 13
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -48.1%; rating input score 13; 13th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.78; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 49.1%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -12.5% per year; rating input score 0; 25th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 16.6% per year; rating input score 100; 81st percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 19.6% of revenue deployed · 13.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $14K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 13 people listed
- Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 4 filing years from 2016 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 — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 20/100.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 13/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 13/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.