Tampa Bay Bowl Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
592643123
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
8138742695
Rating
84
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$13,459,540
Expenses
$13,253,242
Assets
$13,131,398
Liabilities
$5,939,618

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

Leadership & pay

29 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • JAMES MCVAY (PRESIDENT/CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • JAMES MCVAY (PRESIDENT/CEO): $993,443 total reported compensation
  • MICHAEL SCHULZE (DIRECTOR OF SPONSORSHIPS): $339,787 total reported compensation
  • LINDA KARPOVICH (TICKET/BUSINESS MANAGER): $309,259 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

To create an economic impact in the tampa bay area, positively showcase the community nationally and internationally, and manage an event that adds to the quality of life in our area while making a significant (continued on sch o) financial contribution to ncaa member institutions and providing a safe, educational and unique experience for the student athletes participating in the game.

What it reported doing in 2024

The reliaquest bowl is a new year's eve college football game that pays significant fees to ncaa participating schools for their appearance in our new year's eve game. This year the reliaquest bowl paid a combined $6,659,448.00 to the sec and big ten conferences. The reliaquest bowl has paid approximately $183,000,000 over its brief history to ncaa member institutions. The reliaquest bowl assumes the tremendous financial risk and liability with its financial guarantees to the schools. The reliaquest bowl not only guarantees enormous amounts but also provides hospitality, entertainment, and gifts to the ncaa schools as a part of its commitment. Since its inception, the bowl has generated an economic impact of over $1.2 billion for the tampa bay area community.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 97% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 63% 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 total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 75
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 34
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 83.3%; rating input score 83
  • Program expense ratio: 86.3%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 92.9%; rating input score 93; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 6 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Pass
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Pass
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 96.6%; rating input score 97; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • 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: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.5%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.45; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 16%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.2% per year; rating input score 100; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.4% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 1.9% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 83.3% of revenue deployed · 86.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 24 of 24 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $11.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $993K · 29 people listed · 6 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $150K reported
  • Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants and executive pay
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 29 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 24 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.
  • Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.

Key Signals

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

  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 7/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 32/100.