We-cycle

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
364679302
IRS 990 coverage
2013–2024
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2012, Form 990-N 2011
Location
Aspen, CO, USA
Phone
9702059222
Rating
78
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Human Service Organizations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,345,191
Expenses
$2,363,860
Assets
$1,951,390
Liabilities
$863,142

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

4 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • MIRTE MALLORY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

Highest reported compensation

  • MIRTE MALLORY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR): $158,570 total reported compensation
  • JACK DIMMIT (SYSTEM DIRECTOR): $119,189 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

We-cycle's mission is to connect people to place with community-supported bike share.

What it reported doing in 2024

We-cycle is designed as a first/last mile transit option to complement the roaring fork valley's extensive bus service and to provide a healthy and convenient in and around town mode of travel with the goal of reducing carbon emissions and traffic congestion. In 2024, we-cycle operated in the following Colorado jurisdictions: city of aspen, town of basalt, town of snowmass village, pitkin county, and eagle county. In 2024, we-cycle operated 88 stations and over 450 bikes and 12,000+ riders completed 261,063 rides system-wide.

Operating model

Revenue model
Grant-funded. 87% of the money available for current operations came from government grants.
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

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 87
  • Transparency & Controls: 65
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 29
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 86.4%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 85.7%; rating input score 86
  • Fundraising efficiency: $181.66 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 91; 91st percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
    • Compensation committee: Missing
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Missing
    • Board or committee approval: Missing
  • 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: 5 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 62
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • 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: -0.8%; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.83; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.44; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 11.8%; rating input score 25; 25th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 23.2% per year; rating input score 100; 88th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 21.1% per year; rating input score 100; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.9% per year; rating input score 100; 80th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 86.4% of revenue deployed · 85.7% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 2 of 2 board members independent · 5 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $2M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $159K · 4 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $125K reported
  • Consistency: 30 of 30 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 5 filed schedules · includes major donors and executive pay
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2013 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 3 filed money-flow records
  • 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: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 7 not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 31/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 25/100.