· Private foundation
Creigh Family Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k47 grants · $165k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $165k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HILLSDALE COLLEGE | $47,500 |
| WABASH COLLEGE | $45,000 |
| MERCERSBURG ACADEMY | $45,000 |
| Concordia University | $27,500 |
| Austin University | $5,500 |
| American Legislative Exchange Council | $4,500 |
| Christian Urban Education Services | $4,500 |
| National Association of Scholars | $4,500 |
| Institute for Justice | $4,500 |
| The Claremont Institute | $4,500 |
| Heritage Foundation | $4,500 |
| American Institute for Economic Research | $4,500 |
| Stanford UniversityHoover Institution | $4,500 |
| American Civil Rights Project | $4,500 |
| New Civil Liberties Alliance | $4,500 |
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 (FY19–25, $43k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +47% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
58 repeat relationships — 50 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- WCWabash College7× · 2019–2025 · $230k · revenue +35%
- CUCONCORDIA UNIVERSITY7× · 2019–2025 · $129k · revenue +25%
- NWNEBRASKA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY7× · 2019–2025 · $38k · revenue +16%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $10k
- SUStanford UniversityHooker Instituteone grant, 2023 · $5k
- JMJAMES MARTIN CENTERone grant, 2019 · $4k
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.
To advance the practice of higher education attorneys for the benefit of the institutions they serve.
The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
Enhance the ability of actec members to provide the most efficient and highest quality services to their clients; develop qualified trust and estate counselors; improve and reform probate, trust and tax laws, procedures, and standards of…
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
The objectives and goals of the institute shall be to receive and administer funds for the purpose of providing and supporting educational programs for lawyers, legal academics, and members of the judiciary, conferences and publications…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Adams County Historical Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 47 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
47 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 47 of the 70 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 Wabash College ↗
- Who funds CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds HILLSDALE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds NEBRASKA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC ↗
- Who funds PLATTE INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMIC RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Pacific Legal Foundation ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN STATES LEGAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CUES FUND ↗
- Who funds BARRY GOLDWATER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COUNCIL OF TRUSTEES AND ALUMNI ↗
- Who funds THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY FOR LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY STUDIES ↗
- Who funds MANHATTAN INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CATO INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds DICKINSON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds LIBERTAS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds National Parents Organization Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR ECONOMIC RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds Foundation for Economic Education Inc ↗
- Who funds FIRST THINGS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Hudson Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds THE EQUAL VOTING RIGHTS INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Speech First Inc ↗
- Who funds New Civil Liberties Alliance ↗
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: Lincoln Community Foundation Inc · Donors Trust Inc · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · Greater Horizons · Bader Family Foundation · LeRoy Thom Jean Thom and T-L Foundation · D F Dillon Foundation · Sarah Scaife Foundation Incorporated · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc
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 Creigh Family 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.
- Linfield University — 4% of income from government
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.