The Marcus Anderson Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
991151641
IRS 990 coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
Durham, NC, USA
Phone
8645295458
Rating
71
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$88,657
Expenses
$43,159
Assets
$70,373
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

9 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MARCEL ANDERSON (BOARD MEMBER)
  • MARCUS ANDERSON (VICE CHAIR)
  • VICTOR BRUINTON (CHAIR)

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 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The marcus anderson foundation (maf) was established to bridge the gap between talent and opportunity, nurturing the creative and intellectual potential in communities through impactful programs, workshops, and partnerships. Our foundation is built on the principles of education, community outreach, and the transformative power of music and the arts. Maf is committed to: nurturing the next generation of talent, maf supports the majace music festival, awards scholarships to college students, and donates instruments to aspiring musicians. Our mission also includes expanding access to expert education in steam fields for students and adults through both online and in-person programs. We proudly invest in programs that cultivate leadership, build confidence, and enrich lives through entertainment and the artsempowering individuals to grow through creativity and purpose. Maf initiatives: scholarships & educational support, instrument donations, steam education access, leadership & arts devel

What it reported doing in 2025

The organization served as the presenting sponsor of a regional jazz festival, generating approximately 31,000 in support of its charitable mission and increasing exposure to over 500 prospective donors across multiple giving levels. The organization also conducted on-site outreach to provide information about its programs and services.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 100% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
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 - A large share of total spending goes to programs and the filed numbers largely add up. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 69
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 66
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 47.8%; rating input score 48
  • Program expense ratio: 98.2%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: $112.65 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 1 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 14
    • 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: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 51.3%; rating input score 88; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.63; rating input score 34; 34th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • Where the money goes: 47.8% of revenue deployed · 98.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 7 of 7 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 4 filed program accomplishments · $42K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 9 people listed
  • Consistency: 15 of 15 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • 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 48/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 34/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.