Pearse Lyons Ace Foundation Inc Fka the Margin of Excellence Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
300521487
IRS 990 coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-N 2009
Location
Nicholasville, KY, USA
Phone
8598859613
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Educational Services and Schools - Other

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$309,786
Expenses
$404,408
Assets
$116,034
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

5 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MARK PEARSE LYONS (PRESIDENT)

People named in this filing

  • MARK PEARSE LYONS (PRESIDENT)
  • DEIRDRE MARY LYONS (VP/SECRETARY/TREASURER)
  • LARRY HEHMAN (DIRECTOR)

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

To provide educational and charitable activities in the united states and around the world to enhance and improve the quality of life of those in need. To provide scholarships, organize community service projects and build schools and housing for victims of natural disasters.

What it reported doing in 2025

Haiti relief fund to provide direct assistance to the haitian people with the goal of rebuilding lives. The foundation supports two haitian primary schools by improving and upgrading school buildings and providing financial support for operations, including teacher salaries, maintenance, supplies and meals for the students. When one of the schools was notified that its building would no longer be available, the foundation provided financial support to help construct a new building. The new building offers space for even more children than the school was previously able to serve.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 96% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 86% of its reported program spending out as grants.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 88
  • Transparency & Controls: 70
  • Accountability: 70
  • Sustainability: 25
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 98%; rating input score 98
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 91.7%; rating input score 92; 20th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: 0 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Limited
    • Requires narrative reports: Limited
    • Conducts field audits: Limited
    • May suspend future funding: Limited
    • Requires financial reports: Limited
    • Conducts site visits: Limited
    • Requires grant agreements: Limited
    • May require repayment: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 93.3%; rating input score 93; 56th 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: 2 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 29
    • 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: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -30.5%; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.29; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 77; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 6.1% per year; rating input score 100; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -5.7% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 0.1% per year; rating input score 100; 23rd percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 98% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 5 board members independent · 2 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $396K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 5 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 19 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, and grants
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 4 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • 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.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • High — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 7/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 16/100.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.