Fortaleza Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
852941202
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2023, Form 990-N 2020
Location
Lowell, MA, USA
Phone
9788666386
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Single Organization Support

Reported finances

Revenue
$232,835
Expenses
$229,610
Assets
$408,108
Liabilities
$4,459

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

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Vladimir Saldana (President)
  • Cecilio Hernandez (Executive Director)

Highest reported compensation

  • Cecilio Hernandez (Executive Director): $89,387 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Fortaleza is an advocacy group working to ensure educational equality for Latino students grades K-12 in the Lowell Public School System. The group was formed in Lowell, Massachusetts in 2017 by parents, community members, and faith leaders. Fortaleza's purpose is to advocate for the removal of structural inequities and barriers impacting the education of Latino students and to advocate for the elimination of Latino education opportunity gaps.

What it reported doing in 2025

Advocacy for the removal of structural inequities and barriers impacting the education of Latino students and for the elimination of Latino education opportunity gaps to ensure educational equality for Latino students grades K-12 in the Lowell Public School System.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 83% 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 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: 48
  • Transparency & Controls: 94
  • Accountability: 90
  • Sustainability: 40
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 50.4%; rating input score 50
  • Program expense ratio: 50.4%; rating input score 50
  • Fundraising efficiency: $6.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 28; 28th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 81st 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; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 75
    • 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: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 1.4%; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.78; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 39; 39th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 38.9%; rating input score 6; 6th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -10% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 27% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 32% per year; rating input score 100; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 50.4% of revenue deployed · 50.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 6 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $116K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $89K · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 31 of 31 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 7 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 2 filing years from 2024 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • 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.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 50/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 50/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 28/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 39/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Independent financial-statement audit not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 6/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 39/100.