Memphis Business Academy
Legal name: Memphis Business Academy Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 201195290
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Memphis, TN, US
- Phone
- (901) 505-0551
- Rating
- 68
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Charter Schools
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $25,554,680
- Expenses
- $24,975,729
- Assets
- $41,343,323
- Liabilities
- $16,294,234
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
17 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- REV ANTHONY ANDERSON (CO-CEO)
- APRIL BOBO (CO-CEO)
Highest reported compensation
- REV ANTHONY ANDERSON (CO-CEO): $241,121 total reported compensation
- APRIL BOBO (CO-CEO): $183,580 total reported compensation
- MENTHIA BRADLEY (DIRECTOR OF PRE-K AND HUMAN RESOURCES): $147,670 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
The mission of the Memphis Business Academy is to ensure high academic achievement of students from the Frayser/Raleigh area and to help them to develop the knowledge, skills, and dispositions that will enable them to be successful in school and beyond. The Academy is dedicated to the high quality teaching of mathematics, science, social studies, and language arts with a focus on business, entrepreneurship, and financial responsibility.
What it reported doing in 2024
The mission of the school is to improve the academic achievement of elementary, middle and high schools in math, science, social studies and language arts with a business/finance emphasis.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Grant-funded. 97% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
- 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
SUPPORTED - Most voting board members are independent and the filed numbers largely add up. 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: 53
- Transparency & Controls: 65
- Accountability: 100
- Sustainability: 46
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 59.4%; rating input score 59
- Program expense ratio: 60.4%; rating input score 60
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 62nd 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: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 9 of 9 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: Pass
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 2.3%; rating input score 43; 43rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.66; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.39; rating input score 37; 37th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 5.5%; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 7.5% per year; rating input score 100; 58th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 10.3% per year; rating input score 100; 75th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 14.2% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 3 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 59.4% of revenue deployed · 60.4% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 8 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $15.1M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $241K · 17 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $734K reported
- Consistency: 28 of 28 current checks pass
- Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 9 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.
- Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 43/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 37/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 47/100.