· Public charity
The Right Rider Access Fund Inc
To promote the safe and responsible use of off-highway vehicles and to preserve their access to appropriate lands.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 6 grants below total $439,280 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $449,780 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $10,500 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 · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $81k
- $250k+1 grant · $350k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATIONAL OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE CONSERVATION COUNCIL (NOHVCC) | $350,000 |
| TREADLIGHTLY | $26,280 |
| QUIET WARRIOR RACING | $25,000 |
| SOUTHERN TRAIL ADVOCATES AND RIDERS | $20,000 |
| KEWEENAW ATV CLUB | $10,000 |
| POST WILDFIRE OHV RECOVERY ALLIANCE | $8,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 95% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +75% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k 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
- NONATIONAL OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE CONSERVATION COUNCIL INC7× · 2017–2024 · $2.8M · revenue -35% · 67% of their budget
- QWQUIET WARRIOR RACING7× · 2017–2024 · $175k
- TLTREAD LIGHTLY INC7× · 2017–2024 · $146k · revenue +75%
Funded once
- QWQUIET WARRIOR RACINGone grant, 2023 · $25k
- RARENO AREA DIRT RIDERSone grant, 2021 · $20k
- SOSTEWARDS OF THE SEQUOIAone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue -42%
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.
Promote and support skills and safety for mountain biking in and around the front range of northern Colorado and southern Wyoming. This includes trail upkeep and expansion and safe biking education.
Protect, Maintain and Promote Off Highway Vehicle Activities
Snowmobile trail grooming and maintenance.
To promote & encourage protection of wildlife/wilderness - grooming trails
Creating positive outcomes for mountain biking
Trail maintenance
Gunnison Trails is a non-profit trail advocacy organization established to assist land managers and other organizations in maintaining existing trails, educating users on responsible trail-based recreation, and pursuing opportunities for…
Trail Maintenance on Public Lands
Promote the development and maintenance of trails throughout the state of Ohio for a variety of user groups. To Pursue, promote and protect the interest of trail users.
The coconino trail riders (ctr) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization committed to preserving the sport of motorized single-track trail riding. ctr advocates for off-road motorcycle recreation opportunities and works closely with land…
The organization was formed to help maintain, enhance and expand the Hawes Trail System to be enjoyed by bikers, hikers, and all outdoor enthusiasts.
preserve ohv riding on public lands - THIS NON PROFIT HAS BEEN CLOSED/DISSOLVED AS O FFEBRUARY 2020
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ride With Respect Nonprofit Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Coalmont Ohv Park Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 16 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 NATIONAL OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE CONSERVATION COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds TREAD LIGHTLY INC ↗
- Who funds KEWEENAW ATV CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS TRAILS EDUCATION AND MOTORIZED MANANGEMENT ↗
- Who funds STEWARDS OF THE SEQUOIA ↗
- Who funds Coalmont OHV Park Inc ↗
- Who funds POST WILDFIRE OHV RECOVERY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds RIDE WITH RESPECT NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Wild Coast Trails Association ↗
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: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Right Rider Access Fund 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.
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.