Maranatha Baptist University
Legal name: Maranatha Baptist University Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 391097032
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2009–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Watertown, WI, USA
- Phone
- 9202062314
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Affiliation
- Christianity
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $19,081,586
- Expenses
- $18,782,192
- Assets
- $23,252,967
- Liabilities
- $5,973,149
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
22 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- DR MATTHEW DAVIS (CEO)
- DR DAVE ANDERSON (PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- DR MATTHEW DAVIS (CEO): $182,977 total reported compensation
- MR DONALD DONOVAN (VP BUSINESS AFFAIRS): $137,966 total reported compensation
- DR DAVE ANDERSON (PRESIDENT): $87,202 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Maranatha Baptist University exists to develop leaders for ministry in the local church and the world. (Tagline from homepage/organization identity). Veterans Benefits Veterans Benefits – Maranatha is approved for the training of students entitled to benefits under Public Laws 89-358 and 634, Social Security, and Rehabilitation Benefits. Students who are entitled to benefits under these laws should apply to the Department of Veterans Affairs for authorization. Recipients should contact the Financial Aid Office as soon as they enroll in classes. Federal Tuition Assistant (TA) provides financial assistance for active duty and reserve members enrolled in undergraduate and graduate courses offered on-campus or by distance learning. Service members need to apply for TA directly with their branch of service.
What it reported doing in 2024
The sole program service activity is the operation of a christian university 1491 main campus and online students. All activities are directly related to this purpose. The university prints promotional materials and a course catalog.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 85% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 88% 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.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
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 fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 79
- Transparency & Controls: 79
- Accountability: 77
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 83.2%; rating input score 83
- Program expense ratio: 84.3%; rating input score 84
- Fundraising efficiency: $13.02 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Pass
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 84.2%; rating input score 84; 18th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 67
- 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: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.6%; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.24; rating input score 44; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.26; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 2.6%; rating input score 72; 72nd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2% per year; rating input score 100; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 1.5% per year; rating input score 100; 15th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 0.5% per year; rating input score 100; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 83.2% of revenue deployed · 84.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 16 of 19 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15.8M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $183K · 22 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 2 contractors listed · $1.2M reported
- Consistency: 29 of 29 current checks pass
- Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
- Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 10 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 2 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 9 not reported.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 46/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 44/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 51/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.