Big 12 Conference

Legal name: The Big 12 Conference Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
752604555
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024
Location
Irving, TX, USA
Phone
4695241000
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$610,904,862
Expenses
$609,408,614
Assets
$59,594,578
Liabilities
$44,583,195

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

Leadership & pay

24 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • GORDON GEE (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • LAWRENCE SCHOVANEC (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • LINDA LIVINGSTONE (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • WENDY WINTERSTEEN (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • JAMES D HESS (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)
  • RICHARD LINTON (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • BRETT YORMARK (COMMISSIONER): $5,605,123 total reported compensation
  • RENU KHATOR (PRESIDENT/DIRECTOR): $3,598,823 total reported compensation
  • VICTOR BOSCHINI JR (CHANCELLOR/DIRECTOR): $3,498,121 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

The mission of the conference is to: advance standards of scholarship, sportsmanship and equity with the highest ideals of conference membership; support the development of national-championship caliber intercollegiate athletic programs; organize, promote and administer intercollegiate athletics among its member institutions; optimize revenues and provide supporting services compatible with both academic and competitive excellence; and encourage collaboration in areas beyond athletics that builds good-will between institutions and promotes the overall missions of the universities.

What it reported doing in 2024

The conference collects revenue on behalf of the member schools from television agreements, bowl games, and championship events, as well as grants from the national collegiate athletic association (ncaa) and remits net revenues to the member school's athletic department.

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 95% of its reported program spending out as 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 some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 85
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 32
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 95.8%; rating input score 96
  • Program expense ratio: 96.4%; rating input score 96
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 5 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 83
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 0%; rating input score 0; 4th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 7 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 78
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • 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: 0.2%; rating input score 32; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.1; rating input score 3; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.75; rating input score 19; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 2%; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 7% per year; rating input score 100; 57th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.5% per year; rating input score 100; 24th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 1 programs and campaigns described on the official site
  • Where the money goes: 95.8% of revenue deployed · 96.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 0 of 14 board members independent · 7 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $587.4M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $5.6M · 24 people listed · 5 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $7.5M reported
  • Consistency: 34 of 34 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 15 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 32 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.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 9 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 32/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 3/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 19/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 55/100.