Academic Magnet Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 262530146
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2014–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024
- Location
- North Charleston, SC, US
- Phone
- (843) 746-1300
- Rating
- 92
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Nonmonetary Support N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $96,754
- Expenses
- $79,235
- Assets
- $247,987
- Liabilities
- $24,584
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
People named in this filing
- CHAD TIPPEY (TREASURER)
- CHARLES CLAUS (BOARD CHAIR)
- JACOB PERIMUTTER (PRINCIPAL)
Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To enhance Magnet's long-term excellence by funding programs that support and enhance student outcomes before, during, and after their four years at Magnet.
What it reported doing in 2024
To provide funding for classroom/faculty needs/curriculum enrichment/college prep enhancement services
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 95% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Liabilities are high compared with assets and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 82.9%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 97.2%; rating input score 97
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.1%; rating input score 71; 71st percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 3.13; rating input score 75; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.1; rating input score 18; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 17.5% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.2% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 9.1% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 82.9% of revenue deployed · 97.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 5 filed program accomplishments · $77K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: Filed and resolved organization relationships.
- 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 — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 18/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.