ACE Mentor Program of America

Legal name: Ace Mentor Program of Cleveland

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271547626
IRS 990 coverage
2018–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2016
Location
Cleveland, OH, USA
Phone
2163678082
Rating
57
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Education N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$325,223
Expenses
$288,573
Assets
$590,120
Liabilities
$0

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

People named in this filing

  • CYNTHIA LEITSON (CHAIR)
  • JANELLE HINKLE (EXECUTIVE DIR VICE CHAIR)
  • ERIN LUKE (SECRETARY)

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 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To inform and excite high school students about careers in architecture, engineering, and construction through mentoring and scholarships.

What it reported doing in 2024

High school seniors participated in the summer experience. This program provides the participants with six weeks of research, brainstorming and community engagement with architecture, construction and engineering professionals to create and develop concepts for community projects. The projects, which were shared with various cleveland organizations, focused on utilizing vacant lots, existing buildings, and land in ways that would enhance the immediate area and provide uses like recreation, general leisure and public gathering.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 54% for direct work, and 46% for grants.

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 a relatively small share of total spending goes to programs.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 34
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 64
  • Sustainability: 64
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 37.5%; rating input score 37
  • Program expense ratio: 39.3%; rating input score 39
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 100%; rating input score 100; 80th 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: 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: 11.3%; rating input score 62; 62nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.04; rating input score 60; 60th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 1.6% per year; rating input score 100; 38th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 9.3% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9% per year; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 6 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 4 operating locations identified
  • Where the money goes: 37.5% of revenue deployed · 39.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 25 of 25 board members independent · 1 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $114K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 19 of 19 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, and executive pay
  • Filing history: 7 filing years from 2018 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 37/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 39/100.
  • High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 5 of 6 not reported.