· Private foundation
Dr Lewis a Hare & Ruth Lerman Hare Charitable
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 50% of DR LEWIS A HARE & RUTH LERMAN HARE CHARITABLE’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k18 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FRIENDS OF KISHORIT | $10,000 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION OF AZ | $6,500 |
| TOLEDO CHRISTIAN EAGLE 1 FUND | $3,000 |
| LA RABIDA CHILDRENS HOSPITAL | $2,000 |
| LILITH FUND | $1,500 |
| CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES | $1,500 |
| NATIONAL MS SOCIETY | $1,250 |
| ALS ASSOCIATION - AZ CHAPTER | $1,250 |
| THE NATIONAL PARKINSONS FOUNDATION | $1,250 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| GUIDE DOG FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| JEWISH FREE LOAN | $1,000 |
| HANDI-DOGS | $1,000 |
| HEIFER INTERNATIONAL | $1,000 |
| PJ LIBRARY | $1,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those 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.
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.
26 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2024, 7 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 FY2024, 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
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF KISHORIT INC8× · 2017–2024 · $65k · revenue +65%
- AFACLU FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA5× · 2020–2024 · $22k · revenue +61%
- LRLa Rabida Children's Hospital8× · 2017–2024 · $19k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- EFEVERMOR FOUNDATIONone grant, 2017 · $3k
- FBFIRST BOOKone grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue -14%
- CCODACone grant, 2019 · $1k
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.
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
To improve occupational opportunity and public perception of legally blind arkansans through community engagement, work skills enhancement and the production of quality goods and services.
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…
Preservation of civil liberties through advocacy and lobbying.
Disability rights washington's mission is to advance the dignity, equality, and self determination of people with disabilities. we work to pursue justice on matters related to human and legal rights.
The union works to advocate and advance a public policy agenda to support and protect the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the state of iowa. it works to maintain throughout the united states the rights of free…
Ahip is the national trade association representing the health insurance industry. ahip's members provide health care coverage, services and solutions to more than 200 million americans. we are committed to market-based solutions and…
Empowering people who are blind or visually impaired with lifelong skills for safe and independent daily travel.
American foreign service association (afsa) is both the principal advocate for the long-term institutional wellbeing of the professional career foreign service and responsible for safeguarding the interest of afsa members. (continued on…
Empowerment through employment for blind or visually impaired individuals.
Informational services to u.s. military veterans as to how and where to obtain veterans benefits within the government system.
Offering individuals with disabilities the avenues to explore and experience personal growth and achievement through awareness, education, community resources, and personal relationships.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Handi-Dogs Inc and the most unlike its peers is Portlight Strategies Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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. 15 of the 32 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 AMERICAN FRIENDS OF KISHORIT INC ↗
- Who funds ACLU FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds La Rabida Children's Hospital ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GUIDE DOG FOUNDATION FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds PARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds JBI INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS LILITH FUND ↗
- Who funds HANDI-DOGS INC ↗
- Who funds PORTLIGHT STRATEGIES INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST BOOK ↗
- Who funds Friends of Firefighters Inc ↗
- Who funds LITTLE FREE LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds DOGTOPIA 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: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Dr Lewis a Hare & Ruth Lerman Hare Charitable 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.
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% 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.