· Public charity
American Bar Endowment
To make distributions to 501(c)(3) organizations including, in pact, to advance legal study and research and to promote the administration of justice and uniformity of judicial decision throughout the u.s.
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 $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k22 grants · $458k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $626k
- $250k+3 grants · $8.2M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION | $3,940,342 |
| ABA FUND FOR JUSTICE & EDUCATION | $3,937,076 |
| JEWISH FEDERATION OF THE LEHIGH VALLEY | $322,609 |
| GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT | $231,830 |
| FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND | $155,407 |
| MOUNT VERNON LADIES' ASSOCIATION OF THE UNION | $100,000 |
| JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH | $84,451 |
| CHABAD LUBAVITCH OF THE LEHIGH VALLEY INC | $54,000 |
| SANTA FE DREAMERS PROJECT | $25,000 |
| KIDS IN NEED OF DEFENSE (KIND INC) | $25,000 |
| ASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT (ASAP) | $25,000 |
| PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF NEW JERSEY DBA NEW JERSEY APPLESEED | $25,000 |
| REDEMPTION EARNED INC | $25,000 |
| CENTER FOR JUSTICE AND HUMAN DIGNITY (CJHD) | $25,000 |
| ECONOMIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE INC | $25,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $301k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 77% of those 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +38% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 20 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, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $621k 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 Education9× · 2017–2025 · $32M · revenue +38%
- ABAMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION9× · 2017–2025 · $32M · revenue +10% · 44% of their budget
THE MOUNT VERNON LADIES' ASSOCIATION OF THE UNION5× · 2017–2025 · $165k · revenue +89%
Funded once
- FFFOUNDATION FOR BALTIMORE COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARYgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +123%
- NKNorthern Kentucky Legal Aid Societygraduatedone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +71%
- LSLONE STAR LEGAL AIDgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +57%
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.
The legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.
Ala is the catalyst for growth by providing: diverse educational experiences, engaged peer communities, strategic solutions, dynamic resources, and trusted networks.
The mission of the volunteer lawyers project of the boston bar association is to increase access to justice by delivering high quality pro bono civil legal services to eligible clients in the greater boston area.
Legal aid of east tennessee provides legal representation, legal education, and other civil legal services for the low-income population in our community through advocacy of all types.
Afl-cio union lawyers alliance was established to better the conditions of working men and women and their families by enhancing the quality of legal representation that is available to the afl-cio and the national and international unions…
The Public Interest Law Center uses high-impact legal strategies to advance the civil, social, and economic rights of communities in the Philadelphia region facing discrimination, inequality, and poverty. We use litigation, community…
To advocate for domestic violence victims, at-risk children, and other vulnerable individuals by providing over $22.8m in pro bono legal services, social service referrals, and on-going support; to train and support a strong network of…
Work with DC courts, private bar & legal services providers to increase legal representations for low & moderate income DC residents, enhance efficiency of legal services, and reduce barriers to the judicial system.
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…
At legal aid chicago, we work together to provide high quality civil legal aid to people living in poverty and other vulnerable groups.through advocacy, education, collaboration, and litigation we empower individuals, protect fundamental…
Council for court excellence's (cce's) mission is to bring people together to conduct research, educate, and advocate to make d.c.'s unique legal systems more just, equitable, and accountable to the community.
Ensure equal access to justice and improve the lives of low-income communities by providing high-quality legal representation, strategic litigation, valuable legal advice, and meaningful collaborations, outreach, and community education.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Foundation for Legal Services & Education and the most unlike its peers is Integrative Communities Inc Dba the Social Impact Center. 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 34 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
88 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. 88 of the 101 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 American Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN BAR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF THE LEHIGH VALLEY ↗
- Who funds Government Accountability Project ↗
- Who funds THE MOUNT VERNON LADIES' ASSOCIATION OF THE UNION ↗
- Who funds FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds THE NATIONAL JUDICIAL COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds ALASKA STATE ASSOCIATION FOR GUARDIANSHIP & ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR BALTIMORE COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds Northern Kentucky Legal Aid Society ↗
- Who funds ASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds LONE STAR LEGAL AID ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF NEBRASKA ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS LEGAL AID ONLINE ↗
- Who funds LEGAL SERVICES OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS INC ↗
- Who funds PROOF ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds TULSA BALLET THEATRE INC ↗
- Who funds INNOCENCE PROJECT NEW ORLEANS ↗
- Who funds ASIAN SERVICES IN ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds PUERTO RICO LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds DC BAR PRO BONO CENTER ↗
- Who funds Integrative Communities Inc DBA The Social Impact Center ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF NJ INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN AND CHILDREN'S HORIZONS INC ↗
- Who funds ECONOMIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds PROTECT OUR DEFENDERS FOUNDATION % RUSSELL H MILLER ↗
- Who funds DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ↗
- Who funds AMARA LEGAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds Center For Justice And Human Dignity ↗
- Who funds REDEMPTION EARNED INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds PATHWAYS INC ↗
- Who funds NEW FRIENDS NEW LIFE ↗
- Who funds Detroit Justice Center ↗
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: Equal Justice Works · Legal Services Corporation · Tides Foundation · The Skadden Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · Austin Community Foundation Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · American Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education · Tennessee Bar Foundation · The Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Texas Bar Foundation
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 Endowment 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.
- National Center for Victims of Crime Inc — 10% of income from government
- The Special Children Center — 5% of income from government
- Glbtq Legal Advocates & Defenders Inc — 0% 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.