Loading…
Loading…
Wisconsin · Nonprofit
RIGHTWAY CLUB INC (Wisconsin) is funded by 7 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $140,100 in grants to it, the largest being GENTINE FOUNDATION INC ($50,000). 0 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
RIGHTWAY CLUB INC's revenue fell 68% between 2020 and 2021.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 11,626 health nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2021
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
100% of RIGHTWAY CLUB INC’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (78% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 1 of the last 2 reported years ran a deficit.
$65k from 4 funders in 2021, up from $75k and 3 in 2020.
2 of 7 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 32% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of RIGHTWAY CLUB INC’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
RIGHTWAY CLUB INC leans on a few funders — its largest provides 36% of grant income and the top three 71%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2020 67% · 2021 38% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
RIGHTWAY CLUB INC is locally rooted: 68% of its grant income comes from Wisconsin funders.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 7 funders put you under-funded among the 171 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
0% of spending goes to programs.
100%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2021 (financials across 2020–2021), and the filings of 7funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing