Tampa Police Benevolent Association Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
261882019
IRS 990 coverage
2020–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Tampa, FL, USA
Phone
8132288900
Rating
66
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Labor Unions

Reported finances

Revenue
$988,977
Expenses
$546,744
Assets
$1,482,635
Liabilities
$2,218

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

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • BRANDON BARCLAY (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN MILLER (VICE PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • BRANDON BARCLAY (PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN MILLER (VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KRISTINA DURAN (SECRETARY TREASURER)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the Tampa Police Benevolent Association is to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and of the State of Florida; to promote social charitable and educational activities; to ensure fidelity to duty under all conditions; to instill a spirit of benevolence goodwill integrity and mutual respect among our members and the people we serve; to provide for the wellbeing of our members and their families; to promote and sustain fair and equitable treatment of its members; to provide assistance protection and support to members who have been treated unfairly; to prevent unfair labor practices; and to maintain the best possible working conditions and benefits for all members of the organization through the collective bargaining process.

What it reported doing in 2025

To provide for the wellbeing of their members and members families.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 61% for direct work, 2% for grants, and 37% for affiliated organizations.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 52
  • Transparency & Controls: 69
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 81
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 45.8%; rating input score 46
  • Program expense ratio: 79.7%; rating input score 80
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 38.4%; rating input score 38; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: 44.7%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.71; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 120% per year; rating input score 100; 99th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.9% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 19.2% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 45.8% of revenue deployed · 79.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $435K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 4 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $150K reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 41 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes grants
  • Filing history: 6 filing years from 2020 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 38/100.
  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.