Skip to content
Daniel P Hagerman Foundation Corp at a glance

· Private foundation

Daniel P Hagerman Foundation Corp

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.

$7k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$3k
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 2025.

Youth Development$78kEnvironment$32kRecreation & Sports$8kArts & Culture$4kAnimals$3kHuman Services$3kEducation$758Housing & Shelter$200
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$500
Median grant
2
States reached
$181k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE MAYHEW PROGRAM$3,000
SHELL MUSEUM AND EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC$1,500
TAPPLY THOMPSON COMMUNITY CENTER$500
SANIBEL CAPTIVA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION$500
NEWFOUND LAKE REGION ASSOCIATION$500
CIRCLE PROGRAM$400
COMMUNITY HOUSING AND RESOURCES INC$200
FLORIDA WILDLIFE CORRIDOR FOUNDATION INC$100
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, $75) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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%FISH OF SANIBEL-CAPTIVA INC: $75 → 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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$126k · 11 repeat orgs$925 to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
2

Total granted

$126k
$325

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-17%
0%

Still filing today

73%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $600 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
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsArts & CultureAnimalsHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesOther
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

  • M
    MAYHEW
    9× · 2017–2025 · $78k · revenue +117%
  • NL
    NEWFOUND LAKE REGION ASSOCIATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $11k · revenue +194%
  • BR
    BRISTOL RECREATION ADVISORY COUNCIL
    6× · 2020–2025 · $8k · revenue +97%

Funded once

  • TS
    THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $250 · revenue 0%
  • FISH OF SANIBEL-CAPTIVA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $75 · revenue -1%
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
The Coral Reef and Marine Science Foundation Inc C/O James Bildner
—
2
Northeastern Regional Association of Coastal Ocean Observing Systems

The northeastern regional association of coastal and ocean observing systems' (neracoos) mission is to produce, integrate and communicate high- quality information that helps ensure safety, economic and environmental resilience, and…

Science & Tech
3
Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc

The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…

Environment
4
Marine Resources Council of East Florida Inc

The mission of the marine resources council (mrc) is to maintain and enhance the quality of marine systems for the economic, recreational, aesthetic, and environmental use for the people of florida

Environment
5
Reef Environmental Education Foundation

Reef environmental education foundation (reef) was established as a nonprofit organization in 1990. reef conserves marine environments worldwide. our mission is to protect biodiversity and ocean life by actively engaging and inspiring the…

Recreation & Sports
6
Clean Reefs
Environment
7
Wildcoast

The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…

Environment
8
The Quebec-Labrador Foundation Inc

The program mission of the quebec-labrador foundation u.s. is defined by a regional component (new england and eastern canada), and an international component, which ties our regional model to a global conservation network. qlf's program…

Philanthropy
9
Manatee Rescue & Rehabilitation Partnership Inc

To inspire and advance manatee conservation by partnering cooperatively in manatee rescue, rehabilitation, release, and monitoring efforts; improve understanding of manatee biology and health through scientific research; and promote…

Animals
10
Sociedad Ambiente Marino

Environmental and water protection and education

Education
11
Santa Barbara Channelkeeper Inc

The organization was established to protect and restore the santa barbara channel and its watersheds through science-based advocacy, education, field work, community engagement, and citizen enforcement of environmental laws.

Environment
12
National Association of Clean Water Agencies

Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Paws Assisting Veterans. 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

14 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. 14 of the 16 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
6/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MAYHEW: $77,700 · OtherMAYHEWSANIBEL SEA SCHOOL INC: $6,500 · OtherSANIBEL SEA SCHOOL INC+4 more: $4,770 · Other+4 moreNEWFOUND LAKE REGION ASSOCIATION: $11,460 · EnvironmentNEWFOUND LAKE REGION …SANIBEL-CAPTIVA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $9,172 · EnvironmentSANIBEL-CAPTIVA CONSE…CAPTAINS FOR CLEAN WATER INC: $1,783 · EnvironmentCAPTAINS FOR CLEAN WA…Florida Wildlife Corridor Foundation Inc: $1,350 · EnvironmentFlorida Wildlife Corr…+1 more: $250 · EnvironmentBRISTOL RECREATION ADVISORY COUNCIL: $8,134 · Recreation & SportsSHELL MUSEUM AND EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 · Arts & CulturePAWS ASSISTING VETERANS: $3,334 · AnimalsCommunity Housing and Resources Inc: $200 · Housing & ShelterFISH OF SANIBEL-CAPTIVA INC: $75 · Human Services
Other$88,970Environment$24,015Recreation & Sports$8,134Arts & Culture$3,500Animals$3,334Housing & Shelter$200Human Services$75

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 budgetMAYHEW: $77,700 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetNEWFOUND LAKE REGION ASSOCIATION: $11,460 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetSANIBEL-CAPTIVA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $9,172 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBRISTOL RECREATION ADVISORY COUNCIL: $8,134 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetSANIBEL SEA SCHOOL INC: $6,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetSHELL MUSEUM AND EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPAWS ASSISTING VETERANS: $3,334 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCAPTAINS FOR CLEAN WATER INC: $1,783 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFlorida Wildlife Corridor Foundation Inc: $1,350 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCommunity Housing and Resources Inc: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFISH OF SANIBEL-CAPTIVA INC: $75 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.

The John M Bryan Fami…Charles Foundation IncSamuel P Hunt Foundat…Madelaine G Vonweber …New Hampshire Charita…Ge Aerospace Foundati…Morgan Stanley Global…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The John M Bryan Family FundCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The John M Bryan Family Fund · Charles Foundation Inc · Samuel P Hunt Foundation · Madelaine G Vonweber Trust Todd Fahey & William Tucker Co-Trustees · New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Daniel P Hagerman Foundation Corp funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Daniel P Hagerman Foundation Corp. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Sanibel-Captiva Conservation Foundation: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 16 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 Daniel P Hagerman’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