We Ride 4

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
850847186
IRS 990 coverage
2023–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2022
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
3032468545
Rating
58
Verdict
MIXED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Fund Raising and/or Fund Distribution

Reported finances

Revenue
$237,556
Expenses
$204,258
Assets
$260,602
Liabilities
$20,000

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

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Highest reported compensation

  • Sharon Madison (Executive Dir.): $72,000 total reported compensation
  • John Genell (Director of Ops): $24,000 total reported compensation

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

Overview

Mission

Our mission is to support other non-profit organizations that enrich the lives of children through better health, activities and personal development. Through the sport of cycling, our goal is to create awareness and support for the non-profits we partner with each year.

What it reported doing in 2025

Through the sport of cycling, our goal is to create awareness and support for the non-profits we partner with each year. Through our efforts, We Ride 4 will provide enhanced marketing & branding, creative fundraising and human resources to support the missions of these non-profits. We Ride 4 raises money primarily through memberships, sponsorships, individual donations and merchandise sales. All funds raised will support the operation of the club and direct contributions to partnering charities.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 72% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 65% for direct work, and 35% for grants.

The verdict

MIXED - 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: 33
  • Transparency & Controls: 78
  • Accountability: 79
  • Sustainability: 47
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 34.2%; rating input score 34
  • Program expense ratio: 38%; rating input score 38
  • Fundraising efficiency: $3.98 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 17; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 3rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: 69.8%; rating input score 70; 49th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th 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: 14%; rating input score 63; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.28; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.08; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 47%; rating input score 4; 4th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -0.2% per year; rating input score 0; 28th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 14% per year; rating input score 100; 78th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 17.4% per year; rating input score 100; 79th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 34.2% of revenue deployed · 38% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 9 of 9 board members independent · 4 of 8 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 1 filed program accomplishment · $78K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $72K · 11 people listed
  • Consistency: 23 of 25 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 6 filed schedules · includes major donors and grants
  • Filing history: 3 filing years from 2023 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5 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.

  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 34/100.
  • Moderate — Financial Efficiency: Program expense ratio scored 38/100.
  • High — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 17/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 7 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 47/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 4/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.