Brandon Anderson Foundation
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 814792062
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2019–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA, USA
- Phone
- 3102774657
- Rating
- 79
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Youth Development Programs
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $40,226
- Expenses
- $139,953
- Assets
- $121,238
- Liabilities
- $4,664
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
2 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- BRANDON P ANDERSON (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
People named in this filing
- BRANDON P ANDERSON (PRESIDENT & DIRECTOR)
- ANA VALENCIA (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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The brandon anderson foundation is a unique 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that believes any person has the ability to tap into their greatest potential with the right exposure. The foundation aims to support and create initiatives that uplift, engage and support the community through access to the arts, supplemental education and unique experiences to expand the imagination. With the first initiative, .paak house, the foundation seeks to create a "safe-haven" for the next generation, while cultivating alliances with like-minded non-profit organizations to generate a greater impact -- together. This safe-haven is generated through community outreach, sponsored events, summer programs, & after-school programs, all leading to establishing an actual .paak house building, in an impacted community.
What it reported doing in 2024
Paak house 2024 was postponed to 2025. Paak house 2024 is an event designed to bring awareness to vulnerable teen populations of the community available resources should they find themselves homeless. The 2023 event was held on may 12, 2023 at the ventura county fairgrounds and had a total of 3,200 underserved community members and families given a free vip experience at the event. The vip guests were from various boys and girls clubs from the local community, pals - ventura county, oxnard high school, and unhoused nursing students from California state university - channel islands. The vip experence included vip early entry to the event, meal and entertainment vouchers, and a gift bag.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
- Distribution model
- Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 58% for direct work, and 42% for grants.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and expenses are high relative to revenue.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 83
- Transparency & Controls: 89
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 21
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
- Program expense ratio: 80.7%; rating input score 81
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 26th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 94.7%; rating input score 95; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- 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: -247.9%; rating input score 11; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.87; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.04; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 15.7% per year; rating input score 100; 92nd percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 40th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 80.7% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 1 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
- Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $113K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 2 people listed
- Consistency: 21 of 22 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2019 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
- Related organizations: 4 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: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 11/100.
- High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 22/100.