AS FUNDER ← edit slice ·
the field for →

Adaptive Equipment Provision for Special Needs

01 Adaptive Equipment Provision for Special Needs · 25 edit slice
5
orgs
25
activities
3
strategies
AZ
epicenter
the opening take
This slice touches 5 organizations and 25 activities — SPECIAL NEEDS SOLUTIONS, SQUARE AND COMPASS CHILDREN'S CLINIC, SOUTHERN ARIZONA NETWORK FOR DOWN SYNDROME, FAMILIES FIGHTING CANCER TOGETHER and others. Activity concentrates in Arizona (100%). The field's most common shared approach is "Experiential Learning Model", run by 1 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% · 5 orgs
who's here

organizations in this field · 5

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.

Arizona Technology Access Program 1
Government
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 Learning Model
2
Financial Burden Alleviation
8
User-Centered Co-Creation
2
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.

ALTCS Partner
shared by 1 org
AYSO Region 216 Partner
shared by 1 org
Ability360 Partner
shared by 1 org
Adaptive Switch Lab (ASL) Partner
shared by 1 org
Advanced Therapy Solutions Partner
shared by 1 org
Amazon Partner
shared by 1 org
Anthon McLaws Partner
shared by 1 org
Banner University Medical Center Government
shared by 1 org
Ben Ritchie Partner
shared by 1 org
Brenda Del Monte Partner
shared by 1 org
Center for Neurosciences in Tucson Partner
shared by 1 org
Children's Clinics Partner
shared by 1 org
Children’s Clinics Partner
shared by 1 org
Cricket Wireless Partner
shared by 1 org
DDD Partner
shared by 1 org
DDD Support Coordinator 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.