Skip to content

· Private foundation

Andrew R and Janet F Miller 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.

$2.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$2.0M
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Environment$9.2MEducation$310kRecreation & Sports$175kArts & Culture$145kAnimals$130k
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k9 grants · $240k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $350k
  • $250k+2 grants · $2.3M
$30,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$22M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LEELANAU CONSERVANCY$2,025,000
CORAL REEF ALLIANCE$250,000
FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION (FGCU) - THE WATER SCHOOL$100,000
GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY$50,000
NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN$50,000
CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN$50,000
EVERGLADES FOUNDATION - EVERGLADES LITERACY PROGRAM$50,000
FRIENDS OF SLEEPING BEAR DUNES$50,000
ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES$30,000
FLOW FOR THE LOVE OF WATER (GROUNDWATER EXPANSION PROGRAM)$30,000
FLORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION$30,000
CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA$25,000
LINCOLN PARK CONSERVATORY$25,000
CONSERVATION RESOURCE ALLIANCE$25,000
GLEN LAKE ASSOCIATION$25,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 13% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $300k → 10%NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN: $280k → 10%FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION (FGCU) - THE WATER SCHOOL: $100k → 11%CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION: $25k → 13%EVERGLADES FOUNDATION - EVERGLADES LITERACY PROGRAM: $50k → 15%GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $1.0M → 7%LINCOLN PARK CONSERVATORY: $35k → 14%NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $50k → 8%CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $300k → 10%NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN: $50k → 10%FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION (FGCU) - THE WATER SCHOOL: $50k → 11%EVERGLADES FOUNDATION - EVERGLADES LITERACY PROGRAM: $50k → 15%GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $75k → 7%LINCOLN PARK CONSERVATORY: $30k → 14%NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $45k → 8%CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $300k → 10%NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN: $50k → 10%FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION (FGCU) - THE WATER SCHOOL: $50k → 11%EVERGLADES FOUNDATION - EVERGLADES LITERACY PROGRAM: $50k → 15%GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $50k → 7%LINCOLN PARK CONSERVATORY: $30k → 14%CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $250k → 10%NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN: $30k → 10%FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION (FGCU) - THE WATER SCHOOL: $50k → 11%EVERGLADES FOUNDATION - EVERGLADES LITERACY PROGRAM: $40k → 15%FLOW FOR THE LOVE OF WATER (GROUNDWATER EXPANSION PROGRAM): $30k → 7%CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $50k → 10%NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN: $30k → 10%FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION (FGCU): $35k → 11%EVERGLADES FOUNDATION - EVERGLADES LITERACY PROGRAM: $35k → 15%CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $50k → 10%CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN: $50k → 14%CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $50k → 10%CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN: $50k → 14%CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN: $50k → 14%CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN: $50k → 14%CHICAGO BOTANIC GARDEN: $50k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $30k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $30k → 14%GLEN LAKE ASSOCIATION: $100k → 7%FRIENDS OF SLEEPING BEAR DUNES: $50k → 7%FRIENDS OF SLEEPING BEAR DUNES: $37k → 7%FRIENDS OF SLEEPING BEAR DUNES: $35k → 7%FRIENDS OF SLEEPING BEAR DUNES: $27k → 7%LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $2.0M → 7%LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $1.0M → 7%LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $1.0M → 7%LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $400k → 7%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10.0M · 19 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
0

Total granted

$10.0M
$0

Still filing today

84%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationAnimalsRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • TC
    THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE
    8× · 2018–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +30%
  • GT
    GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY
    6× · 2019–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +140%
  • NB
    NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $490k · revenue +60%

Funded once

    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
    Florida Conservation Group Inc

    Mission is to seek protection of land and water resources through restoration and conservation; and conducting education and outreach on the ecological and economic importance of natural lands. we protect land from development and protect…

    Environment
    2
    Conservation Florida Inc

    Conservation florida's mission is to permanently protect florida's water, wildlife, and wild places - the places that make florida home.

    Environment
    3
    Greater Farallones Association

    Gfa works in partnership with and on behalf of the greater farallones and cordell bank national marine sanctuaries to preserve, monitor, research, educate about and enhance these invaluable marine resources.

    Animals
    4
    The Coral Reef and Marine Science Foundation Inc C/O James Bildner
    —
    5
    Land Conservancy of West Michigan

    Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

    Environment
    6
    Coral Conservancy
    —
    7
    Coastal Bend Bays & Estuaries Program Inc

    Coastal bend bays & estuaries program is dedicated to protecting and restoring bays and estuaries of the texas coastal bend. coastal bend bays and estuaries remain a vital part of the environmental and economic landscape by preserving and…

    Environment
    8
    Coalition to Protect Michigan Resources

    The coalition to protect michigan resources's mission is to be a strong voice for the equitable co-management of michigan's fisheries, with both the great lakes and inland lakes and streams, to insure that conservation principles remain in…

    Environment
    9
    Conservation International Foundation

    Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

    Environment
    10
    Huron Pines Resource Conservation & Development Council Inc

    It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…

    Environment
    11
    Archbold Expeditions Inc

    Archbold expeditions, inc.'s mission is to build and share the scientific knowledge needed to protect the life, lands, and waters of the heart of florida and beyond.

    Unclassified
    12
    Rainforest Trust

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

    International
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Naples Botanical Garden Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Park Trust Inc. 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

    16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

    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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 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)
    5
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    16/16
    Grantees still filing
    12/16
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $4,545,000 · EnvironmentLEELANAU CONSERVANCYTHE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $1,325,000 · EnvironmentTHE CORAL REEF ALLIANCEGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $1,220,000 · EnvironmentGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCYNAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $490,000 · EnvironmentNAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INCCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $300,000 · Environment+4 more: $798,356 · Environment+4 moreGLEN LAKE ASSOCIATION INC: $175,000 · OtherGLEN LAKE…THE CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA: $150,000 · OtherTHE CONSE…LINCOLN PARK CONSERVATORY: $145,000 · OtherLINCOLN P…FLOW FOR THE LOVE OF WATER (GROUNDWATER EXPANSION PROGRAM): $130,000 · OtherFLOW FOR …CONSERVATION RESOURCE ALLIANCE: $125,000 · OtherCONSERVAT…ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $95,000 · OtherALLIANCE …FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION (FGCU): $60,000 · OtherFLORIDA G…FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $250,000 · EducationFlorida Wildlife Federation: $130,000 · AnimalsTHE ALLIANCE FOR FLORIDA'S NATIONAL PARKS INC: $55,000 · Recreation & Sports
    Environment$8,678,356Other$880,000Education$250,000Animals$130,000Recreation & Sports$55,000

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $4,545,000 over 7y, 9.7% of budgetTHE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $1,325,000 over 8y, 7.7% of budgetGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY: $1,220,000 over 6y, 6.0% of budgetNAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $490,000 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $300,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC: $275,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetFLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $250,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetNATIONAL PARK TRUST INC: $220,000 over 7y, 1.1% of budgetFriends of the Sleeping Bear Dunes: $178,356 over 6y, 13% of budgetGLEN LAKE ASSOCIATION INC: $175,000 over 4y, 6.6% of budgetTHE CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA: $150,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetFlorida Wildlife Federation: $130,000 over 5y, 2.2% of budgetCONSERVATION RESOURCE ALLIANCE: $125,000 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetTHE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC: $125,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $95,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetTHE ALLIANCE FOR FLORIDA'S NATIONAL PARKS INC: $55,000 over 4y, 1.5% 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.

    • Who funds LEELANAU CONSERVANCY ↗
    • Who funds THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE ↗
    • Who funds GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
    • Who funds NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INC ↗
    • Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
    • Who funds THE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC ↗
    • Who funds FLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
    • Who funds NATIONAL PARK TRUST INC ↗
    • Who funds Friends of the Sleeping Bear Dunes ↗
    • Who funds GLEN LAKE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
    • Who funds THE CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA ↗
    • Who funds Florida Wildlife Federation ↗
    • Who funds CONSERVATION RESOURCE ALLIANCE ↗
    • Who funds THE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
    • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES ↗
    • Who funds THE ALLIANCE FOR FLORIDA'S NATIONAL PARKS INC ↗

    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.

    Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA6.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Andrew R and Janet F Miller Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Andrew R and Janet F Miller Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 16%
    • National Park Trust Inc: 51% of income from government
    • The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc: 16% of income from government
    • Naples Botanical Garden Inc: 3% of income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    4get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    1rely on government for over half their income
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Andrew R and Janet F Miller Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Andrew R and Janet F Miller Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 Andrew R and Janet F Miller’s filings →

    More from the funding graph