Skip to content
Benas Lsbenas Memorial Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Benas Lsbenas Memorial Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$81k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0177% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Housing & Shelter$95kPublic Safety & Disaster$86kFood & Nutrition$85kEnvironment$81kPublic Benefit$71kHuman Services$69kPhilanthropy$26kHealth$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $41k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $40k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONNECTICUT FOODSHARE$10,000
TOWN OF LITCHFIELD$10,000
LITCHFIELD COMMUNITY SERVICES FUND$10,000
OPERATION FUEL$10,000
CHORE SERVICE OF NORTHWESTERN CT$7,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
MENTAL HEALTH CONNECTICUT$5,000
SUSAN B ANTHONY PROJECT FOR WOMEN INC$5,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS$5,000
END HUNGER CONNECTICUT$5,000
REBUILDING TOGETHER IN LITCHFIELD$5,000
COVENANT TO CARE INC$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 (FY17–25, $133k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 4% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $5k → 14%CHORE SERVICE INC: $10k → 9%SUSAN B ANTHONY PROJECT: $10k → 9%LARC: $10k → 9%SUSAN B ANTHONY PROJECT: $8k → 9%SUSAN B ANTHONY PROJECT: $5k → 9%COVENANT TO CARE INC: $4k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $10k → 11%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $6k → 11%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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$622k · 12 repeat orgs$80k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +35% since the first grant, against +30% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
6

Total granted

$622k
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+30%

Still filing today

75%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $36k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterPhilanthropyFood & NutritionPublic Safety & DisasterHealthOther
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

  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    9× · 2017–2025 · $86k · revenue +46%
  • OF
    OPERATION FUEL INCORPORATED
    8× · 2017–2025 · $81k · revenue +29%
  • CF
    CONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $70k · revenue +153%

Funded once

  • CS
    CHORE SERVICE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +26%
  • TA
    THE ARC OF LITCHFIELD COUNTY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +30%
  • TD
    THE DIAPER BANK OF CONNECTICUT INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +26%
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
Connecticut Housing Coalition Inc

The connecticut housing coalition works to expand housing opportunity and to increase the quantity and quality of affordable housing available to people with low and moderate incomes in connecticut through advocacy, education and…

—
2
The Community Action Agency of Western Connecticut Inc

The community action agency of western connecticut is a private non-profit corporation serving western connecticut. its primary purpose is to operate a multi-purpose organization to combat poverty and promote self sufficiency among low…

Community Improvement
3
Connecticut Humane Society

The connecticut humane society is the leading resource in the state for companion animal welfare, enriching the lives of families and communities through adoption services, medical care, education, and prevention of cruelty.

Animals
4
Connecticut Community Care Inc

Connecticut community care, inc provides person-centered care coordination and transition services for elders and individuals with disabilities to help ensure they can live safely in the place they choose to live. people served experience…

Health
5
Connecticut Court Appointed Special Advocates Inc

Empower a statewide network of caring, consistent volunteer court appointed special advocates to advance the best interests of children who have experienced abuse or neglect so every child can find a safe, permanent home to thrive.

Crime & Legal
6
Connecticut Association of Health Care Facilities Inc

The association is the leader in providing services to and advocating for, the state's providers of long-term, subacute, rehabilitative, and assisted living care. additionally, the association serves as a clearing house for information…

—
7
Eastern Connecticut Housing Opportunities Inc

Eastern connecticut housing opportunities, inc. is a non-profit organization organized to provide affordable housing to low-income families of southeastern connecticut.

Housing & Shelter
8
Ct Community Nonprofit Alliance Inc

To advance excellence in community-based nonprofits in connecticut.

Health
9
Connecticut Association for Community Action Inc

The mission of the connecticut association for community action is to strengthen the capacities of its members to empower people in need and improve the communities in which they live.

—
10
Foodshare Inc

Foodshare is leading an informed, coordinated response to hunger as part of the overall community effort to alleviate poverty in hartford and tolland counties.

—
11
Connecticut Citizen Action Group Inc

We encourage Connecticut residents to participate in government and their communities and we conduct public interest lobbying to advocate for consumer and environmental concerns.

—
12
Connecticut Health Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Diaper Bank of Connecticut Inc; the most unlike its peers is Rebuilding Together Litchfield County 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 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
13/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $80,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTOWN OF LITCHFIELD: $71,000 · OtherTOWN OF LITCHFIELDCONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC: $70,000 · OtherCONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INCIndividual grant recipient: $65,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNEW OPPORTUNITIES INC: $15,000 · Other+7 more: $45,500 · Other+7 moreREBUILDING TOGETHER LITCHFIELD COUNTY INC: $95,000 · Housing & ShelterREBUILDING TOGETHER LITCHFIE…OPERATION FUEL INCORPORATED: $81,000 · Housing & ShelterOPERATION FUEL INCORPORATEDAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $86,000 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red…SUSAN B ANTHONY PROJECT INC: $23,000 · Human ServicesSUSAN B ANTHONY PROJE…CHORE SERVICE INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesCHORE SERVICE INCTHE ARC OF LITCHFIELD COUNTY INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE ARC OF LITCHFIELD…+1 more: $4,000 · Human ServicesTHE HOMETOWN FOUNDATION INC: $16,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF COASTAL AND WESTERN CONNECTICUT INC: $10,000 · PhilanthropyFOOD RESCUE US INC: $10,000 · Food & NutritionEND HUNGER CONNECTICUT INC: $5,000 · Public Safety & DisasterMENTAL HEALTH CONNECTICUT INC: $5,000 · Health
Other$346,500Housing & Shelter$176,000Human Services$133,000Philanthropy$26,000Food & Nutrition$10,000Public Safety & Disaster$5,000Health$5,000

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 budgetREBUILDING TOGETHER LITCHFIELD COUNTY INC: $95,000 over 9y, 29% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $86,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetOPERATION FUEL INCORPORATED: $81,000 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetCONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC: $70,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetSUSAN B ANTHONY PROJECT INC: $23,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTHE HOMETOWN FOUNDATION INC: $16,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetNEW OPPORTUNITIES INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHORE SERVICE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetTHE ARC OF LITCHFIELD COUNTY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF COASTAL AND WESTERN CONNECTICUT INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE DIAPER BANK OF CONNECTICUT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFOOD RESCUE US INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMENTAL HEALTH CONNECTICUT INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOVENANT TO CARE FOR CHILDREN INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS CONNECTICUT INC: $2,500 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.

  • Who funds REBUILDING TOGETHER LITCHFIELD COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds OPERATION FUEL INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds CONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC ↗
  • Who funds SUSAN B ANTHONY PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds THE HOMETOWN FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW OPPORTUNITIES INC ↗
  • Who funds CHORE SERVICE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ARC OF LITCHFIELD COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF COASTAL AND WESTERN CONNECTICUT INC ↗
  • Who funds THE DIAPER BANK OF CONNECTICUT INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOD RESCUE US INC ↗
  • Who funds END HUNGER CONNECTICUT INC ↗
  • Who funds MENTAL HEALTH CONNECTICUT INC ↗
  • Who funds COVENANT TO CARE FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS CONNECTICUT 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.

The Connecticut Commu…American Savings Foun…Aetna Foundation IncIon Bank Foundation I…Northwest Community B…Northwest Connecticut…Thomaston Savings Ban…Hartford Foundation f…Olga Sipolin Children…Northwest Ct Communit…Torrington Savings Fo…Connecticut Health Fo…
The Connecticut Community FoundationCT26.1× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Connecticut Community Foundation · American Savings Foundation Inc · Aetna Foundation Inc · Ion Bank Foundation Inc · Northwest Community Bank Foundation Inc · Northwest Connecticut Community Foundation Inc · Thomaston Savings Bank Foundation Inc · Hartford Foundation for Public Giving · Olga Sipolin Children's Fund · Northwest Ct Community Foundation Trust · Torrington Savings Foundation · Connecticut Health Foundation Inc

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 Benas Lsbenas Memorial Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Benas Lsbenas Memorial Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 49%
  • The Arc of Litchfield County Inc: 97% of income from government
  • Mental Health Connecticut Inc: 82% of income from government
  • New Opportunities Inc: 70% of income from government
  • Operation Fuel Incorporated: 51% of income from government
  • The Diaper Bank of Connecticut Inc: 49% of income from government
  • Special Olympics Connecticut Inc: 42% of income from government
  • Covenant to Care for Children Inc: 35% of income from government
  • United Way of Coastal and Western Connecticut Inc: 11% of income from government
  • Connecticut Foodshare Inc: 5% of income from government
  • Susan B Anthony Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
4rely 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 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 Benas Lsbenas Memorial’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