AS FUNDER ← edit slice ·
the field for →

Trail Access Facilitation & Transportation

01 Trail Access Facilitation & Transportation · 17 edit slice
6
orgs
17
activities
2
strategies
AZ
epicenter
the opening take
This slice touches 6 organizations and 17 activities — TUBAC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, COPPER CORRIDOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WESTERN NATIONAL PARKS ASSOCIATION, Empire Ranch Foundation and others. Activity concentrates in Arizona (100%). The field's most common shared approach is "Experiential Connection", run by 3 orgs.
who to look at first

shortlist

Ranked by activity breadth, method diversity, and network reach across the slice. Attach a memo to this report and this list re-ranks around your intent.

where this slice is thin

gap signals

Concrete structural gaps — method mix, geographic concentration, coalition density, funder diversity. Evidence is cited from the slice's own numbers.

where the field lives · works

geography

Orange headquarters dots are sized by how many grantees are based in the state. Green circles mark real locations these orgs say they serve — from city-level populations in this slice's impact_map_populations data. Toggle layers at the bottom right.

regional breakdown · hq density
Arizona 100% · 6 orgs
who's here

organizations in this field · 6

sort by
direct service advocacy research capacity building
where the money comes from

funders already active in this field

Funders named as a funding source on these orgs' own materials. The count is the number of orgs in this slice that cite them — higher means a funder with demonstrable commitment to the field.

Santa Cruz Valley National Heritage Area 1
Foundation
how the field thinks

strategies in this slice

Theories of action extracted from the orgs in this slice. The count is how many orgs cite each one — a strategy run by many orgs in common is a through-line; one cited by a single org is still surfaced so the reader can gauge the full spread.

where strategy meets practice

strategies × activity types

How each shared strategy breaks down across the four activity types the orgs running it actually do.

direct service
advocacy
research
capacity building
Experiential Connection
7
Preservation as Community Memory
3
who works with whom

named partnerships · coalitions · networks

Entities these orgs explicitly call out as partners, coalition members, or networks. Unlike the strategy-sharing graph below (which is inferred from shared approaches), these are relationships the orgs claim on their own sites.

Bureau of Land Management Government
shared by 2 orgs
70+ partner parks Partner
shared by 1 org
Abe’s Old Tumacacori Bar Partner
shared by 1 org
Agents of Discovery Partner
shared by 1 org
Anderson Powersports Partner
shared by 1 org
Anza Trail Coalition of Arizona Partner
shared by 1 org
Arizona Rangers – Sonoita Company Partner
shared by 1 org
Arizona State Parks and Trails Partner
shared by 1 org
Artsy Pets & Ponies Partner
shared by 1 org
Black Dog Contemporary Art Studio Partner
shared by 1 org
Blacksmith’s House Partner
shared by 1 org
Blythe Intaglios Partner
shared by 1 org
Border Community Alliance Partner
shared by 1 org
Boys and Girls Club of Santa Cruz County Partner
shared by 1 org
Bridgewater Links Golf Course Partner
shared by 1 org
Bruce Baughman Studio & Gallery Partner
shared by 1 org
where the field connects

strategy-sharing network

Inferred from shared theories of action: each line connects an org to a strategy it runs. Organizations that share many strategies cluster through the same nodes — funders can spot the field's structural bridges.

scale of the field

rollup metrics

Aggregated scale claims from orgs in the slice. Treat as a floor, not a ceiling — many orgs don't publish these numbers, so totals underrepresent real reach. Extreme outliers (often unit-mismatches upstream) are filtered out.

253
Partner organizations
from 3 orgs