Skip to content
USA Cycling Development Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

USA Cycling Development Foundation

To provide financial support to usa cycling, inc.

$1.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.3M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Recreation & Sports$14M
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $1,251,295, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,308,202 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $56,907 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.
$1,251,295
Median grant
1
States reached
$6.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
USA CYCLING INC$1,251,295
02The need
03

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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%CCB CYCLING EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%OUTRIDE: $10k → 8%TEAM SWIFT JUNIOR DEVELOPMENT: $5k → 9%LUX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $15k → 10%VELOSPORT CYCLING INC: $9k → 10%TEAM NOLAN FINANCIAL CONSULTING & COACHING TEAM SPECIALIZED RACING JUNIORS: $5k → 10%GS ANDIAMO: $5k → 14%STAR TRACK CYCLING INC: $5k → 17%CCNS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM DBA CTCYLING ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM: $38k → 7%SUMMIT BIKE CLUB: $5k → 5%USA CYCLING INC: $2.3M → 9%BOULDER VALLEY CYCLING ALLIANCE DBA BOULDER JUNIOR CYCLING: $10k → 12%TEAM SWIFT JUNIOR DEVELOPMENT: $5k → 9%LUX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $14k → 10%VELOSPORT CYCLING INC: $5k → 10%STAR TRACK CYCLING INC: $5k → 17%CCNS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM DBA CT CYCLING ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM: $10k → 7%USA CYCLING INC: $2.2M → 9%BOULDER VALLEY CYCLING ALLIANCE DBA BOULDER JUNIOR CYCLING: $7k → 12%LUX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $8k → 10%STAR TRACK CYCLING INC: $5k → 17%CCNS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM DBA CTCYLING ADVANCEMENT PROGRAM: $7k → 7%USA CYCLING INC: $1.6M → 9%LUX DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $5k → 10%USA CYCLING INC: $1.6M → 9%USA CYCLING INC: $1.6M → 9%USA CYCLING INC: $1.4M → 9%USA CYCLING INC: $1.4M → 9%USA CYCLING INC: $1.3M → 9%USA CYCLING INC: $189k → 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.
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$14M · 9 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +141% since the first grant, against -36% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
5

Total granted

$14M
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+141%
-36%

Still filing today

89%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Recreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • UC
    USA CYCLING INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $14M · revenue +46%
  • TC
    TAM CYCLING
    6× · 2018–2024 · $58k · revenue +293%
  • BV
    BOULDER VALLEY CYCLING ALLIANCE
    6× · 2017–2023 · $44k · revenue +224%

Funded once

  • OF
    Outride fka The Specialized Foundation
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -36%
  • GA
    GS ANDIAMO
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
  • CC
    Ccb Cycling Education Foundation Inc
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Skyline Mountain Bike Team Inc
Recreation & Sports
2
Evoke Cycling Foudation Inc

Provide cycling to youngsters

—
3
Pchsmtb

Middle and high school MT bike team

—
4
Competitive Edge Racing
Recreation & Sports
5
Aevolo Cycling Inc
Recreation & Sports
6
River Ratz Cycling Inc

To support bicycle activities of all types for riders of all ages and levels of interest.

—
7
Ontogenesis Inc
Recreation & Sports
8
Bicycle Rides Northwest

Cycling

—
9
New Jersey Bicycling Association

Promoting, supporting and expanding bicycle racing in New Jersey

—
10
Midwest Development Cycling Inc

Midwest Devo delivers yearround programming across multiple cycling disciplines designed to meet athletes where they are developmentally and athletically. Core activities include: Weekly skillbased practices during spring summer and fall…

Recreation & Sports
11
Kentucky Flyers Cycling Inc
—
12
Monterey Jr Cycling Development

Promotion of bike safety while riding alone or in a peloton, teaching proper cycling technique along with race strategy and to help foster a love for cycling that will last a lifetime.

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Usa Cycling Inc; the most unlike its peers is Outride fka the Specialized Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 14 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

USA CYCLING INC: $13,505,444 · Recreation & SportsUSA CYCLING INC+7 more: $200,826 · Recreation & SportsLUX DEVELOPMENT CORP: $41,500 · OtherDEVELOPMENT TEAM: $40,500 · OtherGS ANDIAMO: $5,000 · OtherTEAM NOLAN FINANCIAL CONSULTING & COACHING TEAM SPECIALIZED RACING JUNIORS: $5,000 · OtherSUMMIT BIKE CLUB: $5,000 · OtherOutride fka The Specialized Foundation: $10,000 · Youth Development
Recreation & Sports$13,706,270Other$97,000Youth Development$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUSA CYCLING INC: $13,505,444 over 9y, 15% of budgetTAM CYCLING: $57,500 over 6y, 2.0% of budgetCT CYCLING ADVANCEMENT PROGRAMINC: $55,664 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetBOULDER VALLEY CYCLING ALLIANCE: $43,500 over 6y, 3.5% of budgetLUX DEVELOPMENT CORP: $41,500 over 4y, 7.1% of budgetStar Track Cycling Inc: $15,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetVelosport Cycling Inc: $14,000 over 2y, 79% of budgetOutride fka The Specialized Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSUMMIT BIKE CLUB: $5,000 over 1y, 3.2% of 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.

Pro Cyclist FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Pro Cyclist FoundationCO13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pro Cyclist Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization USA Cycling Development Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from USA Cycling Development Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    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 14 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on USA Cycling Development’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