Cycling for Change Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 465471614
- IRS 990-EZ coverage
- 2021–2025
- Forms available
- Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2020
- Location
- Locust Valley, NY, USA
- Phone
- 5162979412
- Rating
- 84
- Verdict
- STRONG
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Human Services N.E.C.
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $75,266
- Expenses
- $61,382
- Assets
- $84,533
- Liabilities
- $49
Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
7 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- SANTHOSH PAULUS (PRESIDENT)
People named in this filing
- JEREMIAH OSULLIVAN (SECRETARY)
- JULIZANN STARACE (VICE PRESIDE)
- SANTHOSH PAULUS (PRESIDENT)
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
To cycle, raise awareness and to raise funds to support organizations on the front lines of battling human trafficking.
What it reported doing in 2025
In 2015 cycling for change (c4c) cycled across america to raise funds and awareness to fight human trafficking - modern day slavery they allow others to be a part of the change by taking part in fundraising events to raise money and awareness for those who have been a part of or affected by human trafficking.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 81% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- 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 - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Total assets are small relative to annual expenses; liquid coverage is unknown and reported officer compensation is a large share of total spending, which may reflect staffing concentration.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 72
- Transparency & Controls: 100
- Sustainability: 54
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 67.2%; rating input score 67
- Program expense ratio: 81.3%; rating input score 81
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 18.4%; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.38; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 12; 12th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 39.9% per year; rating input score 100; 90th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 36.1% per year; rating input score 100; 95th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 18.3% per year; rating input score 100; 82nd percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 67.2% of revenue deployed · 81.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: Filed governance answers
- Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $50K in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 7 people listed
- Consistency: 7 of 7 current checks pass
- Schedules: 3 filed schedules
- Filing history: 5 filing years from 2021 to 2025
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 1 filed money-flow record
- 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 — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 56/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 12/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.