Flats Forward C/o Downtown Cleveland Alliance Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 461005709
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2017–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2024, Form 990-N 2013
- Location
- Cleveland, OH, USA
- Phone
- 2167367799
- Rating
- 92
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Community, Neighborhood Development
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $116,690
- Expenses
- $115,004
- Assets
- $139,344
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
12 people listed
People named in this filing
- ALFRED GEIS (BOARD MEMBER)
- ALLYSON O'KEEFE (BOARD MEMBER)
- ARTHUR BERNSTEIN JAN (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To enhance the quality of life and economic well-being of all flats stakeholders by striving for a dynamic, flourishing, and sustainable neighborhood that supports all stakeholders in cleveland's flats.
What it reported doing in 2024
Flats forward membership program provides businesses and stakeholders an opportunity to directly support the vital initiatives of the flats. The organization strives to work with property owners, neighborhood based partners, and flats stakeholders in this initiative.
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.
The verdict
STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Expenses are high relative to revenue and the available information about grant readiness automatic revocation leaves an important question unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 88
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 87.3%; rating input score 87
- Program expense ratio: 88.6%; rating input score 89
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 38; 38th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.21; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 76; 76th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.9% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 8% per year; rating input score 100; 60th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 19.8% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 87.3% of revenue deployed · 88.6% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $102K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 12 people listed
- Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 7 filing years from 2017 to 2024
- 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.
Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 38/100.
- High — Grant Readiness: Automatic revocation: this organization had its federal tax-exempt status automatically revoked.