· Private foundation
Carl & Caroline Swanson Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $15k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $200k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $51k
- $250k+3 grants · $1.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COLORADO STATE UNIV FOUNDATION | $800,000 |
| CORBETT MEDICAL FOUNDATION | $275,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $250,000 |
| FOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND | $51,000 |
| NATIONAL SNAFFLE BIT FOUNDATION | $40,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| OMAHA EQUISTRIAN FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| RANCHING HERITAGE ASSOCIATION | $25,000 |
| AMERICAN QUARTER HOURSE FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| REINING HORSE SPORTS FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| OHIO QUARTER HORSE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| ERIKA'S LIGHTHOUSE | $5,000 |
| TIBETAN TERRIER HEALTH & WELFARE FOUNDATION | $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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 66% of your 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 5% of Carl & Caroline Swanson Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +97% since the first grant, against +58% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- CSCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION7× · 2018–2024 · $5.2M · revenue +25%
- CMCORBETT MEDICAL FOUNDATION7× · 2018–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +866% · 38% of their budget
- FBFOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND3× · 2022–2024 · $216k · revenue +29%
Funded once
- CSCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FUNDone grant, 2018 · $450k
- EVEQUINE VET EDUCATION PROGRAMone grant, 2022 · $30k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2018 · $15k
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 national horse show association of america, ltd. was founded in 1883 and reorganized in 1972 as a nonprofit corporation. the association was organized to advance equestrian sports in the united states.
Founded in 1994, the foundation for the horse is governed and stewarded by equine veterinarians. our mission to improve the health and welfare of horses is supported by the expertise of many world-renowned caregivers and researchers,…
The NCHA Charities Foundation is organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes as a supporting organization to the National Cutting Horse Association; and is organized and operated to encourage, promote and develop the Cutting…
The corporation is formed to promte and encourage public interest in agricultural and ranching through reining horse shows and programs; to develop standards and performance and judging of reinging horses; to encourage the development and…
The ncha promotes and celebrates the cutting horse, whose origin on western ranches allows us to support ranching and its western heritage. by establishing rules for the conduct of cutting horse shows, ncha strives to give cutters a level…
The harness racing museum & hall of fame is dedicated to comprehensive, active and authoritative support and promotion of the standardbred racing through documentation and preservation of the history and traditions of this american-born…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is American Quarter Horse Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Tibetan Terrier Health and Welfare Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 28 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 COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CORBETT MEDICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK FOR THE HEARTLAND ↗
- Who funds OMAHA EQUESTRIAN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds REINING HORSE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Ranching Heritage Association ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN QUARTER HORSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Erikas Lighthouse A Beacon of Hope for Adolescent Depression ↗
- Who funds OHIO QUARTER HORSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NAP EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds National Collegiate Equestrian Association ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds TIBETAN TERRIER HEALTH AND WELFARE FOUNDATION ↗
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: Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Carl & Caroline Swanson Foundation 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Carl & Caroline Swanson Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Carl & Caroline Swanson 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.