Yay Bikes

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
271603945
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-N 2010
Location
Dublin, OH, USA
Phone
6144034557
Rating
83
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Standard
Sector
Amateur Sports

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$19,842
Expenses
$32,491
Assets
$81,003
Liabilities
$0

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

Leadership & pay

14 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • Brian Estabrook (President)
  • Erin Synk (Vice President)

People named in this filing

  • Annabelle Spranger (Board Member)
  • Brenda Ribble (Board Member)
  • Hannah Higgins (Board Member)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

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

Overview

Mission

See Schedule O

What it reported doing in 2025

Advocacy Summit: Yay Bikes takes an active role in trying to actively influence the conditions that help people safely and comfortably ride bicycles for transportation. To accomplish its mission, the organization continued its annual tradition of hosting an annual Mobility Justice Advocacy Summit event. The goal was to form a coalition of like-minded organizations across Columbus and Central Ohio, focused on creating a better place for people to ride bikes. The idea is to collaborate and create change through shared resources, contacts and action. This years event was co-hosted by Transit Columbus and featured a panel consisting of mobility leaders from Columbus City Council, COTA, City of Columbus, and the Frankin County Engineers Office. It also included small group discussions and a group SWOT analysis for mobility justice activity in central Ohio.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 73% 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 - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered and program spending has declined or grown slowly.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 93
  • Transparency & Controls: 91
  • Accountability: 76
  • Sustainability: 37
  • Growth: 20

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 87%; rating input score 87
  • Fundraising efficiency: $47.36 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 78; 78th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 90.9%; rating input score 91; 19th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 3 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 43
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Fail
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • 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: -63.7%; rating input score 23; 23rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.49; rating input score 41; 41st percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0; rating input score 66; 66th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 58; 58th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -15% per year; rating input score 0; 21st percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: -8.8% per year; rating input score 0; 32nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 5.6% per year; rating input score 100; 65th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 87% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 14 of 14 board members independent · 3 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $28K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 14 people listed
  • Consistency: 17 of 18 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 14 filing years from 2012 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.

  • Moderate — Accountability: Governance controls: 3 of 6 not reported.
  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 23/100.
  • Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 41/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 58/100.