Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

The Historic Route 66 Association of Arizona Inc

To preserve, promote, and protect historic route 66 in arizona.

$289k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$130k
Largest
01What you fund
0196% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192024.

Arts & Culture$504kCommunity Improvement$121kEducation$65kHuman Services$61kCivil Rights$45kHousing & Shelter$29kPublic Benefit$22kRecreation & Sports$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $137k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $130k
$15,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Mohave County Historical Society Inc$130,000
Ash Fork Development Association Inc$25,000
Hualapai Indian Tribe$25,000
Kingman Main Street$24,750
NAU Foundation$16,660
Meetings & Concierges Source$15,000
City of Williams$10,702
Highway Hot Dog LLC$10,000
Route 66 The Road Ahead Initiative$10,000
Individual grant recipient$8,908
City of Winslow$6,954
Joseph City Chamber of Commerce$5,986
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–21, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 26%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Alice's Place: $16k → 26%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 16% of The Historic Route 66 Association of Arizona Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 86% of the giving stays in AZ; read by stated purpose it is 71% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

The Historic Route 66 Association of Arizona Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$583k · 10 repeat orgs$330k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +188% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.

10 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
20

Total granted

$583k
$255k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+188%
+12%

Still filing today

50%
35%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $75k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyHuman ServicesOther

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

  • MC
    MOHAVE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY
    3× · 2019–2024 · $165k · revenue +188%
  • NA
    NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    2× · 2019–2024 · $67k · revenue +320%
  • SO
    STANDIN ON THE CORNER FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2019–2021 · $28k · revenue +64%

Funded once

  • SC
    SOUTHSIDE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2022 · $25k
  • TT
    THEATRIKOS THEATRE COMPANY
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +7%
  • PV
    Pingora Ventures (Scoops on 66)
    one grant, 2023 · $20k

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

04Your field

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.

1
Arizona Railroad Historical Society
Arts & Culture
2
The Bisbee Foundation Inc

Our focus is to work with groups and individuals who are in the arts, humanities, education and historic preservation with goals designed to enhance Bisbees unique place in the history of the Southwest, the contribution made to Bisbees…

3
Arizona Latin-American Medical Association
Unclassified
4
Arizona Site Steward Program Foundation
Education
5
The Dons of Arizona
Education
6
Degrazia Foundation Inc
Unclassified
7
Arizona Railway Museum

Acquisition preservation and Restoration of Railroad Artifacts Showing the History of Arizona

8
Arizona Healthiest State Foundation
9
Bisbee Council on the Arts and Humanities

Through the operation of museums and support of historic preservation we will attempt to interpret and conserve our historical and cultural heritage. Through the presentation and support of cultural and educational programs we will attempt…

Arts & Culture
10
Tucson Presidio Trust for Historic Preservation

The mission of the presidio san agustin del tucson trust is to promote, preserve and interpret the origins and history of tucson

11
California Desert Arts Council Llc
Arts & Culture
12
Arizona Preservation Foundation

Preserve historic resources of az

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Flagstaff Arts Council Inc and the most unlike its peers is John L Nau Iii Foundation. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyChildren's Wellness & Suppo…Arizona Professional Associ…Arizona Health & Community …Private School Tuition Scho…Immigrant Community SupportFraternal & Masonic Organiz…Foster Care Support Services
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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.

05the grantee network

15 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 36 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MOHAVE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY — $165,000 · OtherMOHAVE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETYIndividual grant recipient — $107,428 · OtherIndividual grant recipientHUALAPAI TRIBE — $70,000 · OtherHUALAPAI TRIBECITY OF WILLIAMS — $30,435 · OtherCITY OF WINSLOW — $28,454 · OtherSOUTHSIDE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION INC — $25,000 · OtherASH FORK DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INC — $25,000 · Other+18 more — $204,325 · Other+18 moreNORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $66,660 · EducationNORTHERN ARI…KIDS' CHANCE OF ARIZONA — $15,000 · EducationKIDS' CHANCE…Research Foundation of the City University of New York — $15,000 · EducationResearch Fou…THE BE KIND PEOPLE PROJECT FOUNDATION — $5,250 · EducationKINGMAN MAIN STREET — $41,750 · Community ImprovementSTANDIN ON THE CORNER FOUNDATION INC — $28,300 · Community ImprovementTHEATRIKOS THEATRE COMPANY — $25,000 · Arts & CultureROUTE 66 THE ROAD AHEAD INITIATIVE NFP — $10,000 · Arts & CultureFLAGSTAFF ARTS COUNCIL INC — $9,000 · Arts & CultureJOHN L NAU III FOUNDATION — $24,729 · PhilanthropyAlices Place Inc — $16,000 · Human Services
Other$655,642Education$101,910Community Improvement$70,050Arts & Culture$44,000Philanthropy$24,729Human Services$16,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMOHAVE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY — $165,000 over 3y, 22% of budgetNORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $66,660 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetKINGMAN MAIN STREET — $41,750 over 2y, 60% of budgetSTANDIN ON THE CORNER FOUNDATION INC — $28,300 over 2y, 22% of budgetTHEATRIKOS THEATRE COMPANY — $25,000 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetASH FORK DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INC — $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetJOHN L NAU III FOUNDATION — $24,729 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetAlices Place Inc — $16,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetKIDS' CHANCE OF ARIZONA — $15,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetResearch Foundation of the City University of New York — $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetQUEENS COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC — $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetROUTE 66 THE ROAD AHEAD INITIATIVE NFP — $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetWINSLOW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $10,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetFLAGSTAFF ARTS COUNCIL INC — $9,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE BE KIND PEOPLE PROJECT FOUNDATION — $5,250 over 1y, 0.4% of budget
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 MOHAVE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY
  • Who funds NORTHERN ARIZONA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
  • Who funds KINGMAN MAIN STREET
  • Who funds STANDIN ON THE CORNER FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds THEATRIKOS THEATRE COMPANY
  • Who funds ASH FORK DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION INC
  • Who funds JOHN L NAU III FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Alices Place Inc
  • Who funds KIDS' CHANCE OF ARIZONA
  • Who funds Research Foundation of the City University of New York
  • Who funds QUEENS COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds ROUTE 66 THE ROAD AHEAD INITIATIVE NFP
  • Who funds WINSLOW CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Who funds FLAGSTAFF ARTS COUNCIL INC
  • Who funds THE BE KIND PEOPLE PROJECT FOUNDATION

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.

Arizona Community FoundationAZ20.9× affinity9 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 The Historic Route 66 Association of Arizona Inc 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Historic Route 66 Association of Arizona Inc?

    Find your warmest path to The Historic Route 66 Association of Arizona 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 36 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph