Skip to content

· Public charity

Rock N Ribs Bbq Festival

To raise funds to distribute to area youth organizations.

$81k
Granted FY2019
7
Grants FY2019
1
States reached
$12k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2019.

Youth Development$138kHuman Services$23k
02FY2019 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$11,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$2k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OZARKS REGIONAL YMCA$11,500
BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE$11,500
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES$11,500
GOOD SAMARITAN BOYS RANCH$11,500
GREAT CIRCLE$11,500
OZARK TRAIL COUNCIL - BOY SCOUTS OF$11,500
HARMONY HOUSE$11,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–19, $69k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%HARMONY HOUSE: $12k → 15%GOOD SAMARITAN BOYS RANCH: $12k → 18%HARMONY HOUSE: $12k → 15%GOOD SAMARITAN BOYS RANCH: $12k → 18%OZARKS REGIONAL YMCA: $12k → 15%OZARKS REGIONAL YMCA: $12k → 15%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.
$161k · 7 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2019, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
0

Total granted

$161k
$0

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19
Human ServicesHealthOther
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

  • BB
    BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE OZARKS
    2× · 2018–2019 · $23k · revenue +98%
  • GS
    Good Samaritan Boys Ranch
    2× · 2018–2019 · $23k · revenue +89%
  • FV
    FAMILY VIOLENCE CENTER
    2× · 2018–2019 · $23k · revenue +69%

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    7 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.

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

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    3
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    7/7
    Grantees still filing
    5/7
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE OZARKS: $23,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE OZARKSOZARK TRAILS COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA #306: $23,000 · OtherOZARK TRAILS COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA #306GREAT CIRCLE: $23,000 · OtherGREAT CIRCLEGood Samaritan Boys Ranch: $23,000 · Human ServicesGood Samaritan Boys RanchFAMILY VIOLENCE CENTER: $23,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY VIOLENCE CENTEROZARKS REGIONAL YMCA: $23,000 · Human ServicesOZARKS REGIONAL YMCARONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF THE OZARKS INC: $23,000 · HealthRONALD MCDONALD …
    Other$69,000Human Services$69,000Health$23,000

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

    25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE OZARKS: $23,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetGood Samaritan Boys Ranch: $23,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetFAMILY VIOLENCE CENTER: $23,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF THE OZARKS INC: $23,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetOZARK TRAILS COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA #306: $23,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetOZARKS REGIONAL YMCA: $23,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGREAT CIRCLE: $23,000 over 2y, 0.0% 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.

    Community Foundation of the Ozarks IncMO15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Community Foundation of the Ozarks Inc · Rick and Marsha Floyd Foundation · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Rock N Ribs Bbq Festival funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rock N Ribs Bbq Festival. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
      typical government reliance, FY20–24
      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 7 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

      Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2022) is on record but names no grant recipient (grants abroad are filed by region only, and grants under $5,000 are not itemized), so the figures above are from FY2019, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

      Source object · view filing

      Play a game based on Rock N Ribs Bbq Festival’s filings →

      More from the funding graph