Good Karma Bikes Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271552370
IRS 990 coverage
2015–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025
Location
San Jose, CA, USA
Phone
4082910501
Rating
69
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Services N.E.C.

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$785,772
Expenses
$656,002
Assets
$884,174
Liabilities
$17,402

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

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Andrew Sandler (President)
  • Mario Wijtman (Vice President)

Highest reported compensation

  • James T Gardner (Executive Dir.): $186,102 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

We empower people and build community through bikes.

What it reported doing in 2025

At Good Karma Bikes, our mission is to empower people and build community through bikes. Thousands of bicycles come to us through community donation and impound. The majority of bicycles are refurbished by volunteers and granted to those in-need. The remainder is sold in our second hand bike shop. The clients we serve are homeless, veterans, low-wage workers, and low-income families, however, we have never turned anyone away for financial reasons. As a community organization we are not limited to bicycle repaid and have also assisted client with fixing wheelchairs, walkers, and carts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
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.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 64
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 69
  • Sustainability: 54
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 65.3%; rating input score 65
  • Program expense ratio: 77.8%; rating input score 78
  • Fundraising efficiency: $4.53 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 14; 14th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 2 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 33
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Pass
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 83.3%; rating input score 83; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 4 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Missing
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Fail

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 16.5%; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.35; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 53; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 28.4%; rating input score 9; 9th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 4.2% per year; rating input score 100; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 6.7% per year; rating input score 100; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 23.6% per year; rating input score 100; 84th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 65.3% of revenue deployed · 77.8% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 5 of 6 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $510K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $186K · 6 people listed · 2 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Consistency: 27 of 27 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2025
  • 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.

  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 14/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 52/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 9/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 53/100.