Maysles Institute Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
202545574
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
New York, NY, USA
Phone
2125826050
Rating
76
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Film, Video

Reported finances

Revenue
$889,898
Expenses
$832,853
Assets
$546,799
Liabilities
$212,433

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Kazembe Balagun (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Kazembe Balagun (Executive Director): $107,530 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Maysles Documentary Center (MDC) is a Harlem-based nonprofit organization committed to community, education, and documentary film. We use filmmaking to amplify and expand under-represented artists and narratives, while empowering young filmmakers in creative self-expression, communicating ideas, and advocating needs.

What it reported doing in 2025

The Screening Room at the Maysles Documentary Center, the only independent film house north of Lincoln Center in Manhattan, is dedicated to the exhibition of documentary films, and it provides programming and forum discussions at least four nights out of every week. The Cinema is committed to a democratic experience, one where filmmakers are asked to attend the screenings of their work, and audiences have the opportunity to actively engage the films and each other in post-screening forums. Coupled with its scheduled series, we encourage the programming participation of local social and cultural organizations and citizen-activists to deepen community involvement and provide exposure for under-represented social issues and overlooked artists and their work. We have forged partnerships with organizations as diverse as The National Black Programming Consortium, the New Museum, and the Harlem Historic Parks Association, to name a few. Our suggested-donation ticket model allows for everyone to engage in our programming, regardless of his or her ability to pay. As a result of steady growth in attendance we have recently added capacity to accommodate our frequent overflow audiences.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 62
  • Transparency & Controls: 87
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 66.5%; rating input score 66
  • Program expense ratio: 70.7%; rating input score 71
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.11 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • 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: 8 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 6.4%; rating input score 48; 48th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.66; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 12.9%; rating input score 29; 29th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -2.9% per year; rating input score 0; 9th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 7.1% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 66.5% of revenue deployed · 70.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 13 of 13 board members independent · 8 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $589K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $108K · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 30 of 31 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
  • 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 — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 12/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 48/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 16/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 29/100.