· Private foundation
Allan Neustadt Charitable Trust
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k20 grants · $52k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OKLAHOMA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| ST LUKES MCCALL FD | $7,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $7,500 |
| VALLEY COUNTY PATHWAYS | $5,000 |
| JOHN AUSTIN CHELEY FOUND | $5,000 |
| RICHARD SABALA FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| SNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY | $4,500 |
| DELTA GAMMA FOUNDATION | $3,500 |
| OUTCAST UNDER TRANSFORMATION | $3,000 |
| PAYETTE LAKES SKI CLUB | $2,500 |
| NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ADOPTION | $2,000 |
| MCPAWS ANIMAL SHELTER | $1,500 |
| CENTRAL IDAHO MTN BIKE ASSN | $1,000 |
| CHARLES B GODDARD CENTER | $1,000 |
| MAKE A WISH FOUNDATION | $500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $39k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 22% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +50% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
56 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 38 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
- NCNational Council for Adoption8× · 2017–2025 · $27k · revenue +81%
- PLPAYETTE LAKES SKI CLUB INC9× · 2017–2025 · $27k · revenue +149%
- RSRICHARD SABALA FOUNDATION INC8× · 2018–2025 · $26k · revenue +18%
Funded once
- NMNEW MEADOWS SKATE PARKone grant, 2022 · $8k
- CGCHARLES GODDARD CENTERone grant, 2022 · $5k
- JRJON REVEAL MEMORIAL GOLFone grant, 2022 · $3k
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.
Together, we create a warm and welcoming community enriching the lives of those we support.
The organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.
Providing innovative and life-enriching services for children, adolescents, and adults with disabilities.
The organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.
To preserve and enhance the quality of life at home, with dignity and care.
The minnesota business partnership's mission is to maintain a high quality of life for all minnesotans by ensuring that the state's economy remains strong, globally competitive and its prospects for growth bright by working with elected…
Valle del sol inspires positive change by investing in health and human services to strengthen families with tools and skills for self-sufficiency and by building the next generation of latino and diverse leaders.
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
To improve, maintain and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.
The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.
Midwest dairy works with others to give consumers an excellent dairy experience increasing sales, fostering innovation, and inspiring consumer confidence of dairy products and practices.
Abilitypath housing advances affordable, accessible housing projects that promote independence and inclusive communities for adults with developmental disabilities. through partnerships and innovative program designs, abilitypath housing…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Snowdon Wildlife Sanctuary. 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.
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.
Your grantees are a median of 40 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 10% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
34 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. 34 of the 84 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 VALLEY COUNTY PATHWAYS INC ↗
- Who funds National Council for Adoption ↗
- Who funds PAYETTE LAKES SKI CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds RICHARD SABALA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH ↗
- Who funds OUTCAST UNDER TRANSFORMATION INC ↗
- Who funds DELTA GAMMA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds VOGEL ALCOVE ↗
- Who funds SNOWDON WILDLIFE SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds JOHN AUSTIN CHELEY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHI OMEGA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TEXAS SCOTTISH RITE HOSPITAL FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds TOBYS PLACE INC ↗
- Who funds DALLAS FURNITURE BANK ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HOMES FOR ADULTS INC ↗
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: Max & Victoria Dreyfus Foundation Inc · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Allan Neustadt Charitable Trust 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.
- World Neighbors Inc — 46% of income from government
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.