The Florida State University Real Estate Foundation Incorporated
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 452337977
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2011–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Tallahassee, FL, USA
- Phone
- 8506446000
- Rating
- 65
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $878,301
- Expenses
- $3,025,141
- Assets
- $0
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Richard D McCullough (FSU President)
- Kevin C Graham (Vice President)
- Michael Hartline (INTERIM PRESIDENT UNTIL 10/1/22)
Highest reported compensation
- Richard D McCullough (FSU President): $1,694,587 total reported compensation
- Michael Hartline (INTERIM PRESIDENT UNTIL 10/1/22): $541,796 total reported compensation
- Marla A Vickers (Former FSU Presidential Designee): $524,866 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 fsu real estate foundation AIDS in the advancement of the university by providing oversight and expertise for the university's real estate initiatives. The fsu real estate foundation supports the university and its direct support organizations through administering real estate gift acceptance, strategic land acquisitions, development project leadership and long term real estate planning. The fsu real estate foundation strives to be the source of knowledge and expertise for the Florida state community where real estate is concerned.
What it reported doing in 2024
The fsu real estate foundation receives contributions of real estate to hold, manage, lease, mortgage, develop, administer or sell in order to contribute or distribute all or a portion of the net proceeds from such activity to the university, the Florida state university foundation (fsu foundation), or such other entity as the board may determine appropriate. The fsu real estate foundation makes expenditures, grants, contributions or distributions to or for the benefit of the university, directly and/or through the fsu foundation.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 97% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 99% 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 few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 81
- Transparency & Controls: 75
- Accountability: 23
- Sustainability: 3
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 74.7%; rating input score 75
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 76th 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; 5th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 5 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 56
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: -244.4%; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0; rating input score 0; 0th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
- Officer compensation ratio: 14.2%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 10.8% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 17.3% per year; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 74.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 0 of 2 board members independent · 5 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2.3M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.7M · 7 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 22 of 22 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 13 filing years from 2011 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 16 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 — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 8 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 0/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.