Skip to content
Allin Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Allin Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$5k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Human Services$12kArts & Culture$11kAnimals$10kFood & Nutrition$6kPublic Safety & Disaster$3kHealth$2kEducation$1kEnvironment$950Other$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$59k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT$2,058
LAKE FOREST PRESERVATION FOUNDATION$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$1,000
WTTW$150
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–23, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BEACON PLACE: $5k → 8%BEACON PLACE: $1k → 8%GORTON COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 8%GORTON COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

51%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$24k · 4 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +104% since the first grant, against +35% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
11

Total granted

$24k
$19k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+104%
+35%

Still filing today

100%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 19% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEnvironmentArts & CultureAnimalsEducationHealthOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • PI
    PAWS INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $9k · revenue +463%
  • GC
    Gorton Community Center
    2× · 2022–2023 · $6k · revenue +104%
  • LF
    LAKE FOREST FOUNDATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
    3× · 2023–2025 · $3k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • R
    RAVINIA
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
  • EF
    ELAWA FARM FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +45%
  • BT
    BREAKTHROUGH T1Dgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue +35%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
African Parks Foundation of America

To engage the united states and its citizens in the work of african parks and to promote access to american experience and expertise in the african parks actiities by 1) raising funds for specific projects, activities, training, equipment…

Recreation & Sports
2
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
3
Chicago Parks Foundation

The Chicago Parks Foundation is a separate 501 (c) (3) non-profit organization that also serves as the strategic partner for the coordination of fundraising and charitable resources for the Chicago Park District.

Recreation & Sports
4
Eastern National

Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.

Recreation & Sports
5
The Adirondack Council Inc

The adirondack council ensures the ecological integrity (clean water and air, wildlife habitat, etc.), wild character (solitude, scenic beauty, etc.), and vibrant communities of new york's six-million-acre adirondack park. the adirondack…

Environment
6
The Forest Park Conservancy

To protect and restore the ecological health of forest park and marquam nature park, maintain and enhance their extensive trails networks, promote equitable access, and inspire diverse community appreciation and stewardship of these iconic…

Environment
7
Native Plant Trust Inc

The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.

Environment
8
Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation

This member-supported organization protects and restores iowa's land, water and wildlife for future generations. priorities include permanent land protection, promotion of improved land management and bringing new conservation…

Environment
9
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.

Animals
10
The National Park Service Employee and Alumni Trust Fund

Foster, maintain and improve the morale of nps employees and to promote close ties with current nps members and nps alumni.

—
11
Forever Balboa Park

To sustain, envision, and enhance Balboa Park for all in partnership with the City of San Diego and in collaboration with other organizations in the Park and the community. Our vision for the Park is to maintain and enhance its stature as…

Religion
12
Natural Resources Foundation of

To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Park Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Breakthrough T1D. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 19 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RAVINIA: $7,500 · OtherRAVINIALAKE FOREST FOUNDATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION: $3,000 · OtherLAKE FOREST FOUNDATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVA…LOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2,058 · OtherLOS ANGELES FIRE DEPARTMENTAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $1,000 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETYIndividual grant recipient: $1,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAMERICAN RED CROSS ILLINOIS REGION: $1,000 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSS ILLINOIS REGIONPURCELL PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · OtherPURCELL PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION INCDEERPATH GARDEN CLUB: $1,000 · OtherDEERPATH GARDEN CLUB+2 more: $750 · OtherGorton Community Center: $6,000 · Human ServicesGorton Community CenterThe Beacon Place NFP: $6,000 · Human ServicesThe Beacon Place NFPPAWS INC: $9,000 · AnimalsPAWS INCELAWA FARM FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Arts & CultureELAWA FARM F…+1 more: $150 · Arts & CultureBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $1,000 · HealthNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $500 · EnvironmentNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $200 · EnvironmentTHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $550 · Education
Other$18,308Human Services$12,000Animals$9,000Arts & Culture$5,150Health$1,000Environment$700Education$550

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPAWS INC: $9,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetGorton Community Center: $6,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetThe Beacon Place NFP: $6,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetELAWA FARM FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLAKE FOREST FOUNDATION FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION: $3,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ART INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO: $550 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS INC: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Carney Family Foundat…Clarks Fork FoundationJohn and Kathleen Sch…The Chicago Community…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Carney Family FoundationIL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Carney Family Foundation · Clarks Fork Foundation · John and Kathleen Schreiber Foundation D/B/A Schreiber Philanthropy · The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Allin Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Allin Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 19 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Allin Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home