Cycling Development

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
900646381
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2013
Location
El Dorado Hills, CA, USA
Phone
9168492738
Rating
86
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Amateur Sports

Reported finances

Revenue
$59,694
Expenses
$72,189
Assets
$94,306

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • AMIE FERRY (President)

People named in this filing

  • AMIE FERRY (President)
  • TERRY COSENS (Treasurer)
  • DOUGLAS COSENS (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-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

The organization's mission is to improve the lives of kids between 8-18 years old through exercise, with a focus on cycling. Focus is to show them how to reach their goals through consistent physical training. We are showing them through nutrition how food choices will help them achieve their goals.

What it reported doing in 2025

Assisted kids between 8-18 years old to improve the lives through exercise, with a focus on cycling, showing them how to reach their goals through consistent physical training and how nutritional food choices will help them achieve their goals.

Operating model

Revenue model
Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent revenue detail to tell how this nonprofit funds its work.
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 program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 97
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 33
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 93.1%; rating input score 93

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -20.9%; rating input score 21; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.31; rating input score 55; 55th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.8% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 8.3% per year; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 93.1% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $67K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 12 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 21/100.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 55/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.