Skip to content
Strider Education Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Strider Education Foundation Inc

The strider education foundation's mission through the all kids bike program is to teach every child in america how to ride a bike in kindergarten pe class.

$913k
Granted FY2023
46
Grants FY2023
22
States reached
$66k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2023 · 46 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 46 grants below total $616,590, the rows itemized in this filing. The $913,314 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $296,724 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k31 grants · $172k
  • $10k–50k11 grants · $206k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $238k
$5,210
Median grant
22
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BISMARCK PUBLIC SCHOOLS$66,495
LAUSD$59,205
MINOT PUBLIC SCHOOLS$56,265
SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS$56,265
CABOT PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT$38,835
DICKINSON PUBLIC SCHOOLS$30,690
VISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT$23,725
CHARLOTTE MECHLENBURG SCHOOL DISTRI$20,950
BENTONVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT$20,460
NORTH MONTGOMERY SCHOOL CORPORATION$15,345
LAKE COUNTY SCHOOLS$12,945
MATANUSKA SUSITNA BOROUGH SCHOOL DI$12,570
COWETA COUNTY$10,230
PIQUA CITY SCHOOLS$10,230
GRAND FORKS PUBLIC SCHOOL$10,230
02The need
02

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 72% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ROCHESTER PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $6k → 9%METHACTON SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 7%VISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $24k → 11%LAUSD: $59k → 14%SOUTH JEFFERSON CENTRAL SCHOOL DIST: $5k → 9%DERUYTER CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 11%ROTTERDAM-MOHONASEN CSD: $5k → 14%HANNIBAL CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT: $10k → 17%CORPUS CHRISTI INDEPENDENT SCHOOL D: $5k → 17%ROGERS PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $5k → 8%CABOT PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT: $39k → 12%SPRINGDALE SCHOOLS: $5k → 14%GREENBRIER SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 15%FORT SMITH SCHOOL DISTRICT 100: $9k → 17%LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 17%MONTICELLO SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 21%LAKE COUNTY SCHOOLS: $13k → 10%FORT DODGE COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRIC: $5k → 13%MARSHALL PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $5k → 14%EAST LANSING PUBLIC SCHOOL: $5k → 16%GREEN BAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $5k → 10%WESTBY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $5k → 15%WILLIAMSON COUNTY SCHOOLS: $9k → 4%MEMPHIS-SHELBY COUNTY SCHOOLS: $5k → 17%CHARLOTTE MECHLENBURG SCHOOL DISTRI: $21k → 10%GRANITE SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 8%COWETA COUNTY: $10k → 8%MESA COUNTY VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 11%ST VRAIN VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 12%NORTH MONTGOMERY SCHOOL CORPORATION: $15k → 11%SHELBY EASTERN SCHOOL CORPORATION: $6k → 14%PIQUA CITY SCHOOLS: $10k → 10%SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $56k → 9%CASCADE SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 9%INCHELIUM SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 16%MATANUSKA SUSITNA BOROUGH SCHOOL DI: $13k → 10%DICKINSON PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $31k → 9%MINOT PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $56k → 10%BISMARCK PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $66k → 10%GRAND FORKS PUBLIC SCHOOL: $10k → 13%ROCKBRIDGE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $5k → 12%BRIDGEWATER EMERY ELEMENTARY: $5k → 10%BENTONVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT: $20k → 8%FORT SMITH PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $5k → 17%COWETA COUNTY: $5k → 8%ENUMCLAW SCHOOL DISTRICT: $5k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
WA
ND
MN
WI
MI
NY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
CA
UT
CO
VA
AR
TN
NC
GA
TX
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its field
03the grantee network

6 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2019–2023.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2019 to 2023, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 6 of the 45 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/6
Grantees still filing
2/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Missouri River Educational Cooperative: $66,495 · OtherMissouri River Educational CooperativeLOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $59,205 · OtherLOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTSeattle Public Schools: $56,265 · OtherSeattle Public SchoolsMid-Dakota Education: $56,265 · OtherMid-Dakota EducationCABOT PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT: $38,835 · OtherCABOT PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICTDICKINSON PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $30,690 · OtherVISTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $23,725 · OtherCHARLOTTE MECKLENBURG SCHOOLS: $20,950 · Other+37 more: $264,160 · Other+37 more
Other$616,590

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Round It Up America I…GenYOUTH IncorporatedShare Our StrengthProject Lead the Way …For Inspiration and R…Arkansas STEM Coaliti…Dick's Sporting Goods…Project Lead the Way …Good Sports IncNRA Foundation IncThe Mr Holland's Opus…I Car Education Found…
Round It Up America IncCA38.6× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Round It Up America Inc · GenYOUTH Incorporated · Share Our Strength · Project Lead the Way Inc · For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology (FIRST) · Arkansas STEM Coalition · Dick's Sporting Goods Foundation · Project Lead the Way Inc · Good Sports Inc · NRA Foundation Inc · The Mr Holland's Opus Foundation · I Car Education Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Strider Education Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Strider Education Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 45 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $826k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Strider Education’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home