· Public charity
American Bar Association
To serve equally the members of the legal profession and the public by defending liberty and delivering justice as the national representative of the legal profession, to apply the knowledge and experience of the profession to promote the public good and to encourage cordial discourse among the members of the Bar.
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.
The 34 grants below total $258,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $443,544 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $185,544 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k33 grants · $198k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| University of South Carolina | $60,000 |
| State of Nevada Office of AG | $6,000 |
| Oregon Dept of Justice | $6,000 |
| New York State Dept of Law | $6,000 |
| State of South Dakota | $6,000 |
| State of New Jersey Ofc of AG | $6,000 |
| Attorney General of Texas | $6,000 |
| West Virginia AG's Office | $6,000 |
| Florida Department of Legal Affairs | $6,000 |
| State of Wyoming Ofc of AG | $6,000 |
| Office of the AG Illinois | $6,000 |
| State of Indiana Office of AG | $6,000 |
| Ofc of the Utah AG | $6,000 |
| State of Maryland Ofc of AG | $6,000 |
| Nebraska Dept of Justice | $6,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 99% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
52 repeat relationships — 34 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- ABAmerican Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education5× · 2017–2022 · $28M · revenue +38%
- TITHE IP LAW FOUNDATION2× · 2017–2018 · $35k · revenue +58%
- PUPACE UNIVERSITY2× · 2017–2018 · $12k · revenue +24%
Funded once
- LALEGAL AID SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGOgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $70k · revenue +73%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $58k · revenue +105%
Northwestern Universitygraduatedone grant, 2017 · $38k · revenue +41%
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.
To advance the practice of higher education attorneys for the benefit of the institutions they serve.
The association was formed to maintain a high standard of professional ethics among its members and to aid in the institution of improvements in legal education and to provide information to the public in laws relating to patents,…
The only law school in Rhode Island, Roger Williams University School of Law offers future attorneys a rigorous, hands-on legal education in a supportive, personalized environment. Preparing students for success in the public and private…
The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…
The D.C. Bar Pro Bono Center provides free legal services through pro bono lawyers to low-income individuals, nonprofit organizations and small businesses primarily in the District of Columbia. The Pro Bono Center also recruits and trains…
The national college of advocacy (nca) is the major program of the aaj education fund. the nca shall be the educational arm of aaj; shall be responsible for all aaj educational programs; and shall establish the education policy of aaj. nca…
California western school of law is an independent, aba/aals and wasc senior college and university commission (wscuc) accredited s.d. law school that prepares graduates for the practice of law through a carefully sequenced program of…
New england law/boston dedicates itself to preparing students to be successful lawyers and leaders in the public and private sectors through integrated practical, theoretical and ethical education of the highest caliber and to contributing…
To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.
To advance the science of jurisprudence, secure the more efficient administration of justice, encourage the adoption of proper legislation, advocate thorough and continuing legal education, uphold the honor and integrity of the bar,…
The american bar foundation (abf) seeks to expand knowledge and advance justice through innovative, interdisciplinary, and rigorous empirical research on law, legal processes, and legal institutions. to further this mission the abf…
Mitchell hamline school of law is an independent law school that advances its mission through a combination of legal education, public service, and community engagement. it is dedicated to preparing students to practice law, while also…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Legal Services Inc and the most unlike its peers is Ace Mentor Program of Greater Charlotte Metro-North Carolina. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 66 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.
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: Investor Protection Trust · Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Recreational Boating and Fishing Foundation · Association of State and Territorial Health Officials · National Assembly of State Arts Agencies Inc · Association of Public Health Laboratories Inc · The Pew Charitable Trusts · North American Association of Central Cancer Registries · Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation Inc · Our Rescue · National Foundation for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Inc
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 American Bar Association 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.
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.