Pac-12 Conference
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 941459048
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- San Ramon, CA, USA
- Phone
- 4155804200
- Rating
- 69
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Amateur Sports
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $111,523,130
- Expenses
- $133,194,142
- Assets
- $65,772,776
- Liabilities
- $19,968,134
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- GEORGE KLIAVKOFF (FORMER COMMISSIONER): $6,142,410 total reported compensation
- TERESA GOULD (COMMISSIONER): $1,516,043 total reported compensation
- KIRK SCHULZ (CHAIR): $1,033,276 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
See schedule oto emphasize the welfare of the student-athlete throughout the enterprise and encourage each participant in a conference program to acquire a baccalaureate degree and the skills necessary to function as a productive member of society. To maximize the value of conference affiliation for all member institutions in a manner consistent with the conference's values while maintaining a position of national leadership in the conduct of intercollegiate athletics. To adhere to the highest standards of higher education, academic achievement, ethical conduct, sportsmanship, and a commitment to gender equity and ethnic diversity. To sustain the conference's unparalleled record of athletic excellence. To assure each member institution's commitment to the conference's values, and, in so doing, foster collegial relationships among members to manage the tensions that frequently surface in the competitive environment.
What it reported doing in 2024
The pac-12 conference administers programs for and serves its member institutions; coordinates revenues received from television contracts, postseason bowl agreements, basketball tournaments, affiliate revenue, advertising & sponsorships; and determines distributions to member institutions to fund athletic programs for the benefit of student-athletes. Additionally, the conference receives and administers an ncaa grant restricted to improving officiating programs, enhancing enforcement and compliance of ncaa rules and regulations and enhancing opportunities for women and minority administrators.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 100% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 47% for direct work, and 53% 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 expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 83
- Accountability: 37
- Sustainability: 14
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 99.2%; rating input score 99
- Program expense ratio: 83%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -19.4%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.49; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.3; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 9.9%; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: -1% per year; rating input score 0; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.3% per year; rating input score 100; 35th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 5.2% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 99.2% of revenue deployed · 83% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $110.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $6.1M · 12 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $16.1M reported
- Consistency: 33 of 34 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
- Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 12 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 6 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 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 4/100.
- High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 3/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Schedule R controlled transactions itemized did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 55/100.