Skip to content
Ann M Hart Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ann M Hart 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.

$125k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Animals$133kEnvironment$65kEducation$40kFood & Nutrition$35kHuman Services$32kPublic Safety & Disaster$22kPhilanthropy$10k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $120k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$20,000
IRON TRIBE NETWORK$20,000
HELMSMAN HOUSE FOUNDATION$20,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$20,000
SNOQUALMIE VALLEY DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS$10,000
NO KID HUNGRY$10,000
HOMEWARD PET ADOPTION CENTER$10,000
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION$10,000
PROGRESSIVE ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY (PAWS)$5,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%SOUND GENERATIONS: $1k → 9%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$312k · 10 repeat orgs$72k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +37% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
11

Total granted

$312k
$52k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+26%

Still filing today

80%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentFood & NutritionHuman ServicesInternationalHealthOther
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

  • HP
    HOMEWARD PET ADOPTION CENTER
    5× · 2020–2025 · $55k · revenue +31%
  • SHARE OUR STRENGTH
    3× · 2022–2025 · $42k · revenue +5%
  • NW
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $40k · revenue +39%

Funded once

  • DF
    DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS
    one grant, 2022 · $20k
  • NA
    NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • PR
    PACIFIC RIM CONSERVATION
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -39%
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
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
2
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
3
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
4
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
5
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
6
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
7
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.": - count it: our work is…

International
8
For the Fishes

To address, educate, coordinate, and enhance enforcement capacity to end teh trade in coral reef wildlife for household and other small display aquariums. our supply and demand side strategies are directed locally and globally to…

Animals
9
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
10
The Humane League

We exist to end the abuse of animals raised for food. this mission is executed by persuading companies and institutions to adopt animal welfare policies through negotiation and pressure campaigns, and then holding them accountable to their…

Animals
11
Four Paws International Inc

Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.

Animals
12
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Harvest Emm; the most unlike its peers is Helmsman House Foundation. 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

20 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. 20 of the 24 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $68,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $42,000 · OtherSHARE OUR STRENGTHSNOQUALMIE VALLEY DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $30,000 · OtherSNOQUALMIE VALLEY DOLLARS FOR SCHOLARSDOLLARS FOR SCHOLARS: $20,000 · OtherDOLLARS FOR SCHOLARSTHE SALVATION ARMY: $11,000 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMY+4 more: $9,000 · OtherHOMEWARD PET ADOPTION CENTER: $55,000 · AnimalsHOMEWARD PET ADOPTION CENTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $40,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATIONProgressive Animal Welfare Society aka PAWS: $30,000 · AnimalsProgressive Animal Welfare Society ak…THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $16,000 · AnimalsTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTI…+3 more: $12,000 · Animals+3 moreWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $42,000 · InternationalWORLD CENT…IRON TRIBE NETWORK INC: $40,000 · HealthIRON TRIB…Helmsman House Foundation: $20,000 · Housing & ShelterOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $6,000 · EnvironmentPACIFIC RIM CONSERVATION: $5,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $5,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $1,000 · EnvironmentHAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Philanthropy
Other$180,000Animals$153,000International$42,000Health$40,000Housing & Shelter$20,000Environment$17,000Philanthropy$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $68,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHOMEWARD PET ADOPTION CENTER: $55,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $42,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $42,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $40,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetIRON TRIBE NETWORK INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetProgressive Animal Welfare Society aka PAWS: $30,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $16,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPACIFIC RIM CONSERVATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHAWAIIAN HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HUMANE SOCIETY FOR SEATTLEKING COUNTY: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFeeding America: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHWEST HARVEST EMM: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUND GENERATIONS: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $1,000 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.

Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA9.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Ann M Hart Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ann M Hart Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 24 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 Ann M Hart’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