Bike Delaware
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 262577998
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2022–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2021, Form 990-N 2017
- Location
- New Castle, DE, USA
- Phone
- (302) 722-4591
- Rating
- 60
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Alliance/Advocacy
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $119,691
- Expenses
- $96,815
- Assets
- $258,938
- Liabilities
- $0
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
10 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- JAMES WILSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
- CHRIS CASTAGNO (PRESIDENT)
- LOU HERING (VICE PRESIDENT)
Highest reported compensation
- JAMES WILSON (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $48,000 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
Bike Delaware advocates for safe, convenient and fun cycling and walking for everyone in Delaware. December 13, 2011 at 6:06 pm I relocated to De. 4 yr ago from NW Pa. and brought my bike, expecting to continue to exercise in this pleasant way but the congestion and aggressive driving here (I live in Newark) have made me feel that I am risking my life to ride on the road. The trails I have found seem to go no more than a mile or two and I have to drive to get to them. My bike stands in a closet and I re-inflate the tires periodically to protect them. I applaud the effort to make De. more biker friendly. I would ride again if I could feel safe. E.C.Mitchell.
What it reported doing in 2024
The corporation promotes and advocates for the safety of bicylcing and walking on roadways in the state of Delaware by hosting various fundraising events to bring awareness.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Other-operating. 65% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 92% 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 - 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: 86
- Accountability: 74
- Sustainability: 64
- Growth: 60
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 34.9%; rating input score 35
- Program expense ratio: 39.9%; rating input score 40
- Fundraising efficiency: $1.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 7; 7th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: Limited
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- 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: 3 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 38
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- 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: 19.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.67; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 80; 80th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 49.6%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 74.6% per year; rating input score 100; 98th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: -4.4% per year; rating input score 0; 11th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 11.6% per year; rating input score 100; 70th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: 34.9% of revenue deployed · 39.9% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 3 of 8 filing controls reported
- Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $39K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $48K · 10 people listed
- Consistency: 26 of 27 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors
- Filing history: 3 filing years from 2022 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 35/100.
- Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 4 of 7 not reported.
- High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 7/100.
- High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.