Skip to content
Barton J Ingraham & Gail G Ingraham Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Barton J Ingraham & Gail G Ingraham Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$319k
Granted FY2023
10
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$79k
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, FY2017 to 2023.

Environment$1.5MArts & Culture$753kReligion$165kAnimals$92kRecreation & Sports$40kEducation$11kFood & Nutrition$10kHuman Services$10kOther$0
02FY2023 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k3 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $167k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $138k
$35,457
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$79,461
LEELANAU CONSERVANCY$58,922
BOTANIC GARDEN AT HISTORIC BARNS$35,457
GREENPEACE FUND INC$35,457
UNITY CHURCH$35,457
OLD TOWN PLAYHOUSE$35,457
Individual grant recipient$25,000
TRAVERSE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$5,000
NORTH SKY RAPTOR SANCTUARY$4,596
FROM BOOKS TO BRILLIANCE$4,000
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 (FY22–22, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%REINING LIBERTY RANCH: $10k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
IN
CA
CO
MO
WV
DC
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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.3M · 8 repeat orgs$369k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
36

Total granted

$2.3M
$340k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+5%
+35%

Still filing today

63%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23
EnvironmentArts & CultureAnimalsPhilanthropyInternationalEducationOther
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

  • OT
    OLD TOWN PLAYHOUSE INC
    4× · 2017–2023 · $166k · revenue +38%
  • GREENPEACE FUND INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $165k · revenue +5%
  • TS
    TRAVERSE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA D/B/A TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $15k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • ME
    MARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $27k · revenue +57%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $20k
  • MJ
    MONARCH JOINT VENTUREgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue +140%
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
Six Rivers Land Conservancy Fka Six Rivers Regional Land Conservancy

To conserve, sustain, and connect natural areas, land, and waters that make the places we live special

Environment
2
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
3
Grand Traverse Regional Land Conservancy

The mission of gtrlc is to protect significant natural, scenic and farm lands and advance land stewardship now and for future generations.

Environment
4
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
5
Lake Leelanau Lake Association

The lake leelanau lake association is dedicated to protecting and enhancing the quality and beauty of lake leelanau and its surrounding watershed for current and future generations.

Environment
6
Great Peninsula Conservancy

Preserve in perpetuity the natural habitats, rural landscapes, and open spaces of the great peninsula of washington's puget sound.

Environment
7
Green Lake Conservancy Inc

The green lake conservancy permanently and proactively protects and preserves special places, primarily in the green lake watershed and county by oppering conservation expertise, strattegies, and legal tools for the benefits of humans,…

Environment
8
The Little Forks Conservancy Inc

To permanently protect and improve natural environments in Mid-Michigan by leading and inspiring actions that conserve vital habitats and waterways for the benefit of our entire community.

Environment
9
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
10
Conservation Legacy

Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…

Youth Development
11
Upper Peninsula Land Conservancy

Up land conservancy protects land in michigan's upper peninsula by owning it as nature preserves and working forest reserves, and through conservation easements(perpetual, voluntary agreements that guard the conservation values of the…

Environment
12
Red River Zoological Society

As conservation leaders, the red river zoo connects our community to nature and inspires people to help save species.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Resource Alliance; the most unlike its peers is Good Gaali. 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

26 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 26 of the 46 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)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/26
Grantees still filing
18/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $1,059,922 · EnvironmentLEELANAU CONSERVANCYGREENPEACE FUND INC: $165,457 · EnvironmentGREENPEACE FUND INC+7 more: $60,100 · EnvironmentIndividual grant recipient: $529,461 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBOTANIC GARDEN AT HISTORIC BARNS: $166,457 · OtherBOTANIC GARDEN AT HISTORIC BARNSUNITY CHURCH: $165,457 · OtherUNITY CHURCH+20 more: $176,600 · Other+20 moreOLD TOWN PLAYHOUSE INC: $166,057 · Arts & CultureTRAVERSE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA D/B/A TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC: $15,000 · Arts & CultureGRAND TRAVERSE LIGHTHOUSE MUSEUM: $10,000 · Arts & CultureOLD ART BUILDING: $10,000 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $5,000 · Arts & CultureMARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC: $27,000 · PhilanthropyGrand Traverse Pavilions Foundation: $10,000 · PhilanthropyNorth Sky Raptor Sanctuary: $14,596 · AnimalsXERCES SOCIETY INC: $10,000 · AnimalsSAVING BIRDS THRU HABITAT: $10,000 · AnimalsMONARCH JOINT VENTURE: $20,000 · EducationTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $10,000 · InternationalGood Gaali: $10,000 · InternationalREINING LIBERTY RANCH: $10,000 · Human Services
Environment$1,285,479Other$1,037,975Arts & Culture$206,057Philanthropy$37,000Animals$34,596Education$20,000International$20,000Human Services$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLEELANAU CONSERVANCY: $1,059,922 over 3y, 13% of budgetOLD TOWN PLAYHOUSE INC: $166,057 over 4y, 13% of budgetGREENPEACE FUND INC: $165,457 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetMARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC: $27,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMONARCH JOINT VENTURE: $20,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTRAVERSE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA D/B/A TRAVERSE CITY PHILHARMONIC: $15,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetSleeping Bear Forever DBA Preserve Historic Sleeping Bear: $10,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetXERCES SOCIETY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREINING LIBERTY RANCH: $10,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetGRAND TRAVERSE LIGHTHOUSE MUSEUM: $10,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetINLAND SEAS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSEEDS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPADDLE ANTRIM: $10,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetCONSERVATION RESOURCE ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSAVING BIRDS THRU HABITAT: $10,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetFOR LOVE OF WATER: $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetGRASS RIVER NATURAL AREA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetOLD ART BUILDING: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetGood Gaali: $10,000 over 1y, 7.9% of budgetSAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGrand Traverse Pavilions Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetLeelanau Historical Society: $5,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $100 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.

Oleson FoundationGrand Traverse Region…Rotary Charities of T…Les & Ann Biederman F…Green Brick Foundatio…Jim and Diana Huckle …Harry a and Margaret …Worthington Family Fo…Edmund F and Virginia…The Herrington-Fitch …The Art and Mary Schm…Petoskey-Harbor Sprin…
Oleson FoundationMI26.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Oleson Foundation · Grand Traverse Regional Community Foundation · Rotary Charities of Traverse City · Les & Ann Biederman Foundation Inc · Green Brick Foundation Inc · Jim and Diana Huckle Family Foundation · Harry a and Margaret D Towsley Foundation · Worthington Family Foundation · Edmund F and Virginia B Ball Foundation Inc · The Herrington-Fitch Family Foundation Inc C/O Leslie Lee · The Art and Mary Schmuckal Family Foundation · Petoskey-Harbor Springs Area Community 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 Barton J Ingraham & Gail G Ingraham Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Barton J Ingraham & Gail G Ingraham Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Xerces Society Inc: 22% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely 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.

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 46 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Barton J Ingraham & Gail G Ingraham’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