FSF Grants Workshop | Thursday, May 28, 2026 @ 11:00 am
Thu, May 28, 2026

Summary:

The meeting reviewed post-event reporting requirements for Florida Sports Foundation (FSF) grants, emphasizing audit-ready documentation and consistent organization. Presenters detailed required report categories, deadlines, and evidence standards and described planned Flux system and partner-portal improvements.

Report deadlines and audit framing: post-event reports must be filed within 90 days after an event’s end date, with events ending in June requiring reports by September 1 to close the fiscal year; extensions may be requested in writing. Finance noted prior unfavorable audits and stressed strict documentation matching the original grant purpose and that every reimbursed dollar requires proof of payment.

Proof-of-payment and financial documentation: acceptable evidence includes canceled checks (front and back) showing payee and clearing, ACH/EFT/ACH records that identify the account owner plus invoices, and bank statements that identify the account owner without exposing full account numbers. Invoices labeled only as "grant" are insufficient. Sponsorships and third-party vendor charges must be supported by vendor invoices or equivalent line-item documentation that align with application projections.

Attendance, room nights, and promotion: awards depend on actuals not projections; events achieving 80% or higher of projected metrics receive full awards and below 80% may be prorated unless extraordinary circumstances apply. Hotel pickup reports with clear source identifiers (email headers, letterhead, third-party verification) are required to validate room nights; alternatively, validated studies based on actual visitation (e.g., DI calculator studies) can be accepted. Promotion evidence must clearly connect the event to Florida/FSF/license plate program and include date/location metadata; social media posts with timestamps and URLs are preferred. Organizers were cautioned not to change event-type entries in Flux as that can alter rate calculations.

Flux, program communications, and governance items: presenters described UX improvements to Flux, warned that saving may trigger recalculation so calculated values must be carefully copied into correct fields, and announced monthly "grants game plan" emails plus a partner portal for centralized resources. The board will decide whether attendance at FSF events is required for eligibility; that policy decision remains pending. Staff confirmed they will follow up on requests for brand guidelines and whether the foundation can provide media B-roll.

Participant concerns and operational support: attendees asked about substituting destination visitation reports for contracts and about administrative burden for small rights holders; staff said actual data can satisfy auditors and offered assistance when numbers look disproportionate. A conference room participant clarified documentation expectations (vendor invoices acceptable; not a "shoebox of receipts") and committed to share meeting materials and a documentation handout. A staff member will contact an attendee (Sean Walter) for further clarification. The meeting closed with thanks and a reminder about the upcoming Summit.


Chapters & Topics:

Meeting Start and Workshop Overview
The session began with participant checks and the presenter introduced the workshop’s focus on post-event reporting for FSF grants, listing the main topics to be covered and stating the goal of aligning reporting with audit expectations so all stakeholders are protected. The presenter emphasized that the workshop’s purpose is to get everyone on the same page for submitting documentation in an auditor-friendly format.
* The workshop centers on preparing post-event reports with audit-ready documentation to justify FSF grant payments.

Why Audit-Ready Reporting Matters
The presenter framed all reporting through an audit lens, explaining that post-event reports justify grant awards, contain KPIs, and must satisfy multiple oversight bodies; consistent, auditable documentation is required to justify payments and meet record-retention obligations. The presenter urged that reports tell a clear story with matching names, dates, and sources so reviewers and auditors can reconstruct transactions.

Deadlines, Extensions, and Organization Best Practices
The presenter reviewed timelines including the 90-day deadline after event end, the requirement to submit extension requests in writing, and the September 1 deadline for June-ending events to close the fiscal year; they recommended calendar reminders and emphasized organizing records to allow any reviewer to follow the documentation thread, reducing clarifying questions and review time. The presenter also noted annual audits and the need to retain records for five years.
* All post-event reports are due within 90 days of an event’s end date, with written extension requests considered.
* Organizing documentation clearly and consistently reduces review time and auditor clarifying questions.

Documentation Categories and Examples
The presenter demonstrated an internal worksheet for reconciling multiple documents and listed the documentation categories required in post-event reports—proof of promotion, proof of payment, matching funds, room-night verification, attendance, and insurance—and advised using social media and rights-holder posts for promotional proof while ensuring submitted materials clearly show the benefit. The presenter said follow-up links with supporting-document guidance would be provided.
* Proof of room nights should come from hotel pickup reports or an accepted study based on actual numbers such as a DI calculator study.

Attendance Metrics, Insurance, Flux Calculations, and Award Criteria
The presenter stressed the importance of out-of-state visitor verification for legislative reporting and listed potential sources (tickets, travel reports, surveys, registrations), required certificate-of-insurance details including the Foundation as certificate holder and the Governor's Square Boulevard address, and explained projected versus actual numbers. They instructed careful use of Flux’s calculator—copying values into the correct fields because saves trigger recalculation—and described ongoing Flux UI improvements. Finally, they reiterated grants are reimbursement-based, events at 80%+ receive full awards, below 80% may be prorated, and extraordinary circumstances will be reviewed individually.
* The Foundation must be listed as a certificate holder on insurance with the current Governor's Square Boulevard address and minimum $1 million per occurrence.
* Flux’s calculator requires precise copying of fields because saving recalculates values and errors can change grant awards.
* Grants are reimbursement-based and events meeting 80% or higher of targets will receive full awards; below 80% may be prorated.

Proof-of-payment fundamentals and acceptable payment evidence
The presenter defined proof of payment as two parts—documentation of what was purchased and evidence that payment cleared—and listed acceptable proofs including canceled checks and electronic transfers while noting invoices labeled only as "grant" are inadequate for auditors. The presenter introduced a printed-check example and contrasted it with a cleared canceled check to illustrate the difference.
* Proof of payment must show what was purchased and that the payment cleared; canceled checks or EFT/ACH evidence are acceptable.
* An invoice labeled simply as "grant" is insufficient; line items must describe the actual goods or services purchased.
* Canceled checks must include front and back images showing bank stamps to confirm clearance.

Ambiguities in invoices and bank records; account identification
The discussion covered ambiguous invoices that lack descriptions of goods/services and bank deposits that do not identify the account owner or whether funds are incoming or outgoing; the presenter confirmed bank statements or ACH records are acceptable if they identify ownership without exposing full account numbers.
* Bank statements or ACH records are acceptable proof when they identify the account owner without exposing full account numbers.

Room-night validation and pickup reports
The presenter required tracking backup for room nights such as hotel pickup reports with origin indicators (email, letterhead, third-party source) and asked organizers to submit projected numbers and average room rates rather than highest rates for auditor comparison.
* Validation of room nights requires pickup reports or other tracking backup that clearly indicate origin and projected numbers.

Screen-sharing glitch and post-event data guidance
The presenter resolved a screen-sharing issue, reiterated that post-event reports must be based on actuals not projections, offered assistance if reported numbers seem disproportionate, and cautioned that booking agreements are estimates and changing event types can alter awarded funds.
* Post-event reports must use actuals, not bookings or projections, and staff can help reconcile differences between application and post-event calculations.

Promotional requirements and acceptable evidence formats
The presenter emphasized quality over quantity for promotional components, requiring a clear connection to Florida/the foundation/license plate program, submission of banners/program PDFs/photos with date and location, and demonstrated that screenshots or social-media posts with timestamps and URLs best satisfy auditors.
* Promotional materials must include date and location metadata; social media posts with timestamps and links are the easiest acceptable format for auditors.
* Submitting excessive or irrelevant materials that do not reference Florida, the foundation, or the license plate program slows review and risks rejection.

Social media, curated posts, and examples of accepted vs rejected media
The presenter outlined required metadata for curated social posts (screenshot, link, date, location, contacts), explained how collages lacking date/location were rejected by Department of Commerce, and advised tagging Florida Sports Foundation to streamline verification.
* Event organizers should tag Florida Sports Foundation in event posts to make promotional proof easier to verify.
* A follow-up will confirm whether the foundation will supply B-roll footage for organizers to use as promotional backup.

Media assets, B-roll question, and brand-guidelines follow-up
A participant requested foundation-provided B-roll as superior promotional backup; the presenter said they would confirm whether that content can be supplied and noted prior agreement; attendees requested brand guidelines for logo/banner placement and agreed to discuss guidelines further at the summit.

Flux updates and first grant cycle results
The presenters introduced intentions to improve Flux for transparency and rubric alignment and reported completion of the first grant cycle with ten applications and increased total scores ahead of the board review on the 18th. They solicited feedback from applicants to make the process easier and clearer for future applicants.
* The Flux grants application will be updated for transparency and rubric alignment after feedback from the first grant cycle, which produced ten applications and higher scores ahead of the board review on the 18th.

Monthly communications and board policy timing
The team committed to sending monthly "grants game plan" emails to flag helpful observations and minor changes, and explained final guidance will follow once the board votes to solidify grant policies.
* Monthly program "grants game plan" emails will be sent to communicate minor changes and the board's finalized grant policies once the board vote occurs.

Partner portal development and feedback request
The group described a forthcoming partner portal (separate from Flux) to host meeting minutes, announcements, grant resources, and direct communication links, and reiterated that partner feedback will guide future adjustments and tool development.
* A partner portal is being developed to centralize meeting minutes, announcements, grant resources, and communication links for applicants.

Presentation close and handoff to finance
The presenter concluded their remarks and introduced the finance team to address audit and compliance matters before finance began their presentation.

Finance explanation of audits, compliance, and reimbursement documentation
Karen Peterson of finance explained prior unfavorable audits stemmed from noncompliance with grant fundamentals, emphasized the need to match post-event reports to grant purposes, and stated every reimbursed dollar must have proof of spending to maintain funding for Florida programs.
* Finance emphasized that compliance failures drove unfavorable audits and that strict documentation of reimbursed expenses is required to secure future funding.

Receipt guidance and Q&A on application windows and policy questions
Finance gave practical guidance that ACH/EFT payments can be documented via memo lines plus attached invoices as proof, invited follow-up questions, and then addressed questions from Caleb about quarterly application windows and Flux availability and deferred a policy question about in-person attendance to the upcoming board meeting; a sponsorship receipt clarification question from Sean Walter was raised but not resolved in the segment.
* Acceptable proof for ACH/EFT reimbursements can be the payment memo plus the invoice, which Finance demonstrated as a streamlined approach for receipts.
* Applications follow quarterly windows (applications are for the quarter before the event) and Flux is being adapted to accept applications continuously with applicants indicating target review deadlines.
* Whether in-person attendance at Florida Sports Foundation events will be an eligibility requirement is pending a board policy decision and will be clarified after the board meeting.
* A participant reported they can obtain venue and show receipts for post-event sponsorship expenses but no formal policy clarification about sponsorship timing was provided in this segment.

Questions about receipts and invoice matching
Sean Walter asked whether receipts and invoices must add up to the sponsorship amount and whether receipts from vendors or marketing companies are acceptable, seeking detail on how intricate the documentation requirement will be. He emphasized that his sponsorships mirror the Florida Sports Foundation's restrictions and expressed concern about the administrative burden on small rights holders.

Program requirement clarified — supporting documentation
A conference room participant clarified that the program requires supporting documentation for the expenses listed on the application up to the awarded amount and asked if that explanation made sense to Sean. Sean acknowledged the clarification.
* Event organizers must provide supporting documentation for projected expenses up to the awarded sponsorship amount.

Practical expectations for acceptable documentation
Sean said he has not encountered this level of documentation before and that he will need to educate clients who have events soon to begin collecting records; the conference room participant said they are not expecting a shoebox of receipts and that an invoice with a clear line item for marketing is sufficient. Sean confirmed that an invoice showing what was spent is acceptable.
* The new documentation requirement is unfamiliar to some organizers and will require client education.
* A vendor invoice with a line item (e.g., social media marketing) is generally acceptable instead of many small receipts.

Follow-up and one-on-one support
It was noted that a staff member would reach out to Sean later for a more thorough answer, and Sean accepted that follow-up; he also affirmed he will list expenses and understood the need for dated receipts showing payee information.
* A staff member will follow up directly with Sean Walter to answer his remaining questions.

Distribution of materials and request for tool suggestions
The conference room participant said they will send a link to the meeting recording and the documentation handout to avoid large attachments, offered to develop tools if attendees suggest helpful items, and provided an email address for suggestions. The meeting concluded with thanks and a reminder about the Summit.
* The conference room participant will distribute meeting materials and the documentation handout via a link to avoid large email attachments.
* Attendees were invited to email suggestions for tools to help rights holders collect required documentation.

Closing remark
The meeting closed with final pleasantries and a brief additional comment from Pamela Manley that appears to trail off.


Action Items:

* Event organizer will submit any requests for extensions in writing.
* Event organizer will set a calendar reminder for the day after each event to begin assembling the post-event report.
* Event organizer will provide hotel pickup reports as proof of room nights when available, or supply an accepted study based on actual numbers.
* Presenter will send links to the supporting-document guidance and templates referenced during the meeting.
* Event organizer will list the Foundation as a certificate holder on the certificate of insurance using the Governor's Square Boulevard address and confirm minimum coverage of $1 million per occurrence.
* Event organizers will ask hotels for their pickup reports and include origin indicators such as the email or letterhead when submitting room-night validation
* Event organizers will tag Florida Sports Foundation in event posts used as promotional proof
* A conference room participant will confirm whether the foundation will provide B-roll footage and follow up with Sean Walter
* A conference room participant will discuss brand guidelines for banner and logo placement at the summit
* Sean Walter will educate his clients to start collecting documentation and receipts required for grant/sponsorship applications.
* A staff member will reach out to Sean Walter to answer his documentation questions more thoroughly.
* Sean Walter will list expenses on applications and require supporting invoices or receipts showing dates and payee information
* The conference room participant will send a link to the meeting materials and the documentation handout to attendees.
* Meeting participants will email the conference room participant with suggestions for tools to help rights holders collect required documentation.


Key Questions:

* Is a DI-calculator study an acceptable form of room-night clarification, or do you require hotel pickup reports as proof?
* For events without room-night contracts (e.g., a city hosting the Super Bowl), can destination visitation reports and a destination-calculator based on actual visitation substitute for room-night contracts in post-event reporting?
* Will the foundation provide B-roll footage that organizers can insert into livestreams and commercials as backup promotional material?
* What are the application windows and when should an applicant apply for an event in May?
* Will there be an in-person attendance requirement at Florida Sports Foundation events to be eligible for grants?
* Can you clarify how post-event sponsorship payments should be documented for reimbursement, especially when payment is made after the event?
* Do event organizers need to provide receipts or invoices that collectively match the sponsorship amount and will receipts from vendors or marketing companies suffice?
* Is the program expecting every small receipt or is an invoice with a clear line item acceptable?


Notepad:

* No notes