· Private foundation
Anne M Cabaniss Charitable Trust
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $145k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $400k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ROBERT E LEE MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION | $100,000 |
| TRUSTEES OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY | $100,000 |
| CITY OF BIRMINGHAM ALABAMA | $100,000 |
| BECKET FUND | $50,000 |
| ETHICS AND PUBLIC POLICY CENTER | $50,000 |
| THE FUND FOR AMERICAN STUDIES | $25,000 |
| ACADEMIC FREEDOM ALLIANCE | $25,000 |
| ANIMAL WELFARE LEAGUE OF ALEXANDRIA | $25,000 |
| AMERICAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES AND LETTERS INC | $25,000 |
| YOUNG AMERICA'S FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| HILLSDALE COLLEGE | $20,000 |
| RAPPAHANNOCK BENEVOLENT FUND INC | $5,000 |
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 (FY23–25, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% 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 +22% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 2 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, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
- AWAnimal Welfare League of Alexandria7× · 2018–2025 · $570k · revenue +71%
- SHSTRATFORD HALL6× · 2018–2025 · $520k · revenue +6%
- TBThe Becket Fund3× · 2023–2025 · $175k · revenue +2%
Funded once
- SMST MARY'S ON THE HIGHLANDSone grant, 2018 · $100k
- ITInterparliamentary Task Force on Human Traffickingone grant, 2023 · $25k · 35% of their budget
- PSProject Suma Incone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +7%
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 Alumni Free Speech Alliance brings together alumni groups that support free speech academic freedom and viewpoint diversity at their colleges and universities. Alliance members believe that free speech academic freedom and viewpoint…
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
The Institute discovers, develops, and supports students, scholars, and other intellectuals who maintain the highest standard of academic excellence and who share an interest in the principles of the classical liberal tradition.
Since 1775, the mission of Hampden-Sydney College has been to form good men and good citizens in an atmosphere of sound learning.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Founded in 1780, the american academy of arts and sciences honors excellence and convenes leaders from every field of human endeavor to examine new ideas, address issues of importance to the nation and the world, and work together "to…
To foster the study of international law and to promote international relations on the basis of law and justice.
The National Academy of Public Administration is an independent, 501(c)(3) nonprofit, non partisan Organization established in 1967 and chartered by Congress in 1984. See Schedule O
The American Spectator Foundation is a non-profit, non-partisan media organization responsible for publishing The American Spectator. Through its editorial programs, The American Spectator strives to educate the public on new ideas,…
Wake Forest University, a 501(c)(3) institution of higher education, is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in the liberal arts and in graduate and professional education. The organization is comprised of seven constituent parts: Wake…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ethics and Public Policy Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Interparliamentary Task Force on Human Trafficking. 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 17 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 Animal Welfare League of Alexandria ↗
- Who funds STRATFORD HALL ↗
- Who funds The Becket Fund ↗
- Who funds ETHICS AND PUBLIC POLICY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Young America's Foundation ↗
- Who funds HILLSDALE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds THE WESTMINSTER INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE FUND FOR AMERICAN STUDIES ↗
- Who funds American Academy of Sciences and Letters Inc ↗
- Who funds Academic Freedom Alliance ↗
- Who funds Interparliamentary Task Force on Human Trafficking ↗
- Who funds Project Suma Inc ↗
- Who funds RAPPAHANNOCK BENEVOLENT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE OUR SEABIRDS INC ↗
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: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Anne M Cabaniss Charitable Trust 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.