MAHA Institute Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 934775966
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2024–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-N 2023
- Location
- New York, NY, USA
- Rating
- 59
- Verdict
- MIXED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $2,081,291
- Expenses
- $815,943
- Assets
- $1,265,348
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
1 person listed
Highest reported compensation
- Candace McDonald (Director): $40,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Uniting people together from all backgrounds to uphold core American values from informed consent free speech and individual sovereignty by fostering open dialogue and raising awareness about the influence of major institutions on the political system.
What it reported doing in 2024
Our dedicated team of volunteers mobilizes in Pennsylvania prior to election day to garner support for the Republican party. Our program encompasses a comprehensive ground game strategy covering all congressional districts. We offer training sessions for volunteers coordinate door-to-door canvassing efforts targeting a minimum of 23,000 households engage in direct conversations with 5,300 individuals and organize high-impact high-visibility events to boost enthusiasm and engagement. Through these initiatives we aim to energize voters and promote active participation in the electoral process.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
MIXED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 45
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 82
- Sustainability: 78
- Growth: NotEnoughData
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 32.1%; rating input score 32
- Program expense ratio: 81.9%; rating input score 82
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 90%; rating input score 90; 4th 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: 99.3%; rating input score 99; 38th 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; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 4 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 57
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Limited
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 60.8%; rating input score 95; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.55; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 97; 97th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 4.9%; rating input score 54; 54th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: Limited
- Revenue growth: Limited
- Asset growth: Limited
Details
- Where the money goes: 32.1% of revenue deployed · 81.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 1 of 1 board members independent · 4 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $668K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $40K · 1 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 30 of 33 current checks pass · 3 findings to review
- Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 1 filed related-organization link
- 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.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 32/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 6 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 53/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Functional expense sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Part IX GrantsToDomesticIndividuals column sum did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 54/100.