Skip to content
Crane Hollow Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Crane Hollow Inc

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.

$250
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$250
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2025.

Education$4kArts & Culture$900Environment$470Youth Development$325Recreation & Sports$300Philanthropy$300Health$50
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$250
Median grant
1
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNITED WAY OF HOCKING COUNTY$250
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 91% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%RAVENSUN: $100 → 7%LOGAN ELM EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $285 → 10%FRIENDS OF AULLWOOD INC: $100 → 14%BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF CENTRAL: $125 → 15%UNITED WAY OF HOCKING COUNTY: $250 → 15%BUCKEYE TRAIL ASSOCIATION: $150 → 16%FRIENDS OF CROWELL HILAKA: $50 → 17%THE KENNEDY MUSEUM: $100 → 22%MOTHAPALOOZA: $100 → 22%RAVENSUN: $50 → 7%INTERNATIONAL WASHBOARD FESTIVAL: $100 → 15%BUCKEYE TRAIL ASSOCIATION: $150 → 16%FRIENDS OF CROWELL HILAKA: $30 → 17%HOCKING COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $100 → 15%FRIENDS OF CROWELL HILAKA: $30 → 17%LOGAN BAND BOOSTERS: $100 → 15%INTERNATIONAL WASHBOARD FESTIVAL: $100 → 15%HOPE BLOOMS: $100 → 15%INTERNATIONAL WASHBOARD FESTIVAL: $100 → 15%UNITED WAY OF HOCKING COUNTY: $50 → 15%RAVENSUN: $50 → 15%CAMP OTY'OKWA: $2k → 15%CAMP OTY'OKWA: $630 → 15%CAMP OTY'OKWA: $400 → 15%STUART'S OPERA HOUSE: $350 → 15%STUART'S OPERA HOUSE: $50 → 15%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5k · 7 repeat orgs$1k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
10

Total granted

$5k
$1k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+18%

Still filing today

71%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EducationEnvironmentArts & CultureRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • BT
    BUCKEYE TRAIL ASSOCIATION INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $300 · revenue +181%
  • IW
    INTERNATIONAL WASHBOARD FESTIVAL
    3× · 2021–2023 · $300 · revenue +22%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF CROWELL HILAKA
    3× · 2017–2019 · $110 · revenue +32%

Funded once

  • LE
    LOGAN ELM EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $285 · revenue +18%
  • AO
    ASSOCIATION OF NATURE CENTER ADMINISTRATORSgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $270 · revenue +73%
  • BB
    BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF CENTRAL
    one grant, 2024 · $125
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
Friends of Herrontown Wood

To celebrate Herrontown Woods as a preserve where people of all ages enjoy, explore and learn from nature, inspiring them to become its stewards.

Environment
2
Friends of Wildwood Lake Nature Center Inc

Preserve/Develop Sanctuary

Environment
3
Western Cuyahoga Audubon Society

Environment Education

—
4
Ohio Watercolor Society

Promote artists and have workshops for upcoming events.

—
5
Ohio Hill Country Heritage Are

To engage the public in experiencing and learning about southeastern ohios history and culture by supporting programs, publications, and tours in the region.

Environment
6
Friends of the Arboretum

The mission of the Arboretum is to provide diverse colorful and educational gardens for local citizens and the general public to preserve the Stinson House and to promote volunteerism in the community We strive to improve maintain and…

Environment
7
Ohio Forest Sanctuaries

Conserving ohio's ecosystem through advocacy, education, and public outreach

Environment
8
North Central Ohio Land Conservancy Inc

Protecting natural areas in Ohio through conservation easements and public education regarding the importance of natural areas.

Human Services
9
Ohio Natural Areas and Preserves Association

We are dedicated to promoting protecting and improving Ohios natural areas and preserves.

Environment
10
The Quarry Farm Nature Preserve & Conservation Farm

To provide the opportunity for people of all ages to increase their understanding of the natural environment of northwest ohio and to interact with their fellow inhabitants in a sustainable manner.

Education
11
Gahanna Area Arts Council

he Gahanna area arts council connects and enriches our community through participation in and engagement with the arts.

Arts & Culture
12
Kettle Moraine Natural History Assoc

Kettle Moraine Natural History Association is organized for the charitable and educational purpose of assisting the Department of Natural Resources with interpretive, scientific, historical, educational and related visitor services at…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Buckeye Trail Association Inc; the most unlike its peers is The United Way of Hocking County. 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

8 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. 8 of the 17 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $3,460 · OtherIndividual grant recipientThe United Way of Hocking County: $300 · OtherThe United Way of Hocking CountyINTERNATIONAL WASHBOARD FESTIVAL: $300 · OtherINTERNATIONAL WASHBOARD FESTIVAL+8 more: $825 · Other+8 moreSTUARTS OPERA HOUSE: $400 · Arts & CultureLOGAN ELM EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $285 · EducationFRIENDS OF CROWELL HILAKA: $110 · EducationASSOCIATION OF NATURE CENTER ADMINISTRATORS: $270 · EnvironmentFriends of Aullwood Inc: $100 · EnvironmentBUCKEYE TRAIL ASSOCIATION INC: $300 · Recreation & Sports
Other$4,885Arts & Culture$400Education$395Environment$370Recreation & Sports$300

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSTUARTS OPERA HOUSE: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetThe United Way of Hocking County: $300 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBUCKEYE TRAIL ASSOCIATION INC: $300 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL WASHBOARD FESTIVAL: $300 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetASSOCIATION OF NATURE CENTER ADMINISTRATORS: $270 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF CROWELL HILAKA: $110 over 3y, 0.1% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Crane Hollow Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Crane Hollow Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Crane Hollow Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Crane Hollow Inc 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.

    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 17 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 Crane Hollow’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