· Public charity
American Quarter Horse Foundation
The foundation connects horses and people through charitable giving to support programs that preserve our horses legacy and further the well-being of the american quarter horse family.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 17 grants below total $474,657 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $832,942 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $358,285 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k3 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $259k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $196k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $78,871 |
| TEXAS A&M AGRILIFE RESEARCH | $61,320 |
| AMERICAN QUARTER HORSE ASSOCIATION | $55,441 |
| TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY | $46,667 |
| UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY | $43,915 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS | $33,486 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE | $26,667 |
| NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY | $23,306 |
| MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY | $18,733 |
| TARLETON STATE UNIVERSITY | $18,655 |
| GREAT OAK EQUINE ASSISTED PROGRAMS | $15,000 |
| COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY | $11,800 |
| UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA | $10,209 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS | $10,167 |
| STABLE STRIDES FARM | $7,500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY18–25, $26k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +66% since the first grant, against +48% for the ones you funded once.
20 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $119k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- AQAMERICAN QUARTER HORSE ASSOCIATION8× · 2017–2025 · $345k · revenue +28%
- UOUniversity of Kentucky Research Foundation4× · 2017–2022 · $201k · revenue +66%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION2× · 2017–2018 · $145k · revenue +105%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF GEORGIAone grant, 2022 · $31k
- RMRACING MEDICATION AND TESTING CONSORTIUMone grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue -13%
Cornell Universitygraduatedone grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue +27%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To provide therapeautic benefits to handicapped citizens through a horseback riding program.
We improve quality of life through equine-based therapy to physically, mentally and socially/emotionally challenged individuals. Our unique program integrates academic, social and physical skills using the horse as a catalyst.
To improve the minds, bodies and spirits of children and adults with special needs through the benefits of therapeutic riding and equine assisted activities.
At Unharnessed Potential, we incorporate horses experientially for emotional growth and learning into all our therapy programs. The results of such an experience can be life changing. Incorporating horses as catalysts for learning can calm…
By partnering with horses, we help people realize their individual potential through customized equine assisted services
To improve the lives and health of children and adults in southwest Ohio with special physical, cognitive, social and psychological needs through equine assisted services and therapies. TRI partners extensively with community organizations…
The rehabilitation of horses and people through interaction with each other.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Horses Help Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 32 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
32 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 32 of the 53 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds AMERICAN QUARTER HORSE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds University of Kentucky Research Foundation ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University of Georgia Research Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds RACING MEDICATION AND TESTING CONSORTIUM ↗
- Who funds HORSES HELP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GREAT OAK EQUINE ASSISTED PROGRAMS ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds HEALING STRIDES OF VIRGINIA ↗
- Who funds HEARTS THERAPEUTIC EQUESTRIAN CENTER ↗
- Who funds BRAVEHEARTS THERAPEUTIC RIDING AND EDUCATIONAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds Equine Assisted Development ↗
- Who funds CAMELOT THERAPEUTIC HORSEMANSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds Stable-Spirit ↗
- Who funds Therapeutic Riding of Tucson Inc ↗
- Who funds THREE GAITS INC ↗
- Who funds STABLE STRIDES FARM ↗
- Who funds NEW BEGINNINGS ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Oliver-Hoffmann Foundation · Christopher Reeve Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization American Quarter Horse Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Marion Therapeutic Riding Association Inc — 1% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.