Skip to content
Durig Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Durig Family Foundation 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.

$70k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$48k
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.

Human Services$180kYouth Development$141kHealth$53kEducation$4k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $48k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$868k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SECOND STORY$48,000
NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES$6,000
ORGANIZATION FOR AUTISM RESEARCH$5,000
POSTPARTUM SUPPORT CHARLESTON$5,000
FRIENDS OF SHAPIRO DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER$4,000
AUTISM SOCIETY OF AMERICA NORTHERN VIRGINIA CHAPTE$2,000
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 (FY17–25, $318k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 5%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 5%POSTPARTUM SUPPORT CHARLESTON: $5k → 12%ABUSED & HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE: $30k → 6%THE BARKER ADOPTION FOUNDATION: $3k → 8%ABUSED & HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE: $30k → 6%THE BARKER ADOPTION FOUNDATION: $3k → 8%ABUSED & HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE: $30k → 6%THE BARKER ADOPTION FOUNDATION: $2k → 8%ABUSED & HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE: $26k → 6%THE BARKER ADOPTION FOUNDATION: $2k → 8%SECOND STORY: $24k → 6%BARKER ADOPTION FOUNDATION: $1k → 8%ABUSED & HOMELESS CHILDRENS REFUGE: $23k → 6%SECOND STORY: $48k → 6%SECOND STORY: $38k → 6%SECOND STORY: $23k → 6%CORNERSTONES: $5k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES: $6k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES: $5k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES: $5k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES: $3k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICE: $3k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICE: $3k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICE: $1k → 6%NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICE: $1k → 6%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$359k · 8 repeat orgs$18k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against +21% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
2

Total granted

$359k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+21%

Still filing today

75%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
Human ServicesHealthEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • AA
    ABUSED AND HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $271k · revenue +83%
  • NV
    NORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $27k · revenue +17%
  • AS
    Autism Society of Northern Virginia
    4× · 2022–2025 · $21k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • CI
    CORNERSTONES INC
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue -4%
  • PO
    PARENTS OF AUTISTIC CHILDREN OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +21% · 47% of their budget
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
For Children's Sake of Virginia Inc

For children's sake is dedicated to promoting positive environments for children and families that develop trust, stability and independence.

Human Services
2
Prevent Child Abuse Virginia

To advance programs, practices, and policies that nurture children, empower families, and support communities.

—
3
Children's Home Society of Virginia

The mission of CHSVA is to build strong permanent families and lifelong relationships for Virginia's at risk children and youth.

Human Services
4
Voices for Virginia's Children

The mission of voices for virginia's children is to champion public policies and legislation that achieve positive and equitable outcomes for young people.

Civil Rights
5
Nassau Suffolk Services for the Autistic Inc

Nassau suffolk services for the autistic (nssa) offers hope to people with autism and their families by providing high quality life-long support through services which enable people with autism to function better in everday life. nssa…

Health
6
Children's Home Society of North Carolina Inc

The Children's Home Society of North Carolina's mission is to promote the right of every child to a permanent, safe, and loving family.

Human Services
7
Federation of Virginia Food Banks

Facilitating statewide collaboration among Virginia's food banks, partners, and neighbors to improve nutrition security and empower strong, healthy communities.

—
8
Autism Opportunities Foundation

We improve the lives of the people in our care affected by autism.

Health
9
Newport News Court Appointed Special Advocates Inc

Advocate for abused and neglected children

Crime & Legal
10
ChildSafe Center - Cac

Provide Forensic Interviews and Therapy Services

Human Services
11
Virginia Center for Inclusive Communities

VCIC works with schools, businesses, and communities to achieve success through inclusion.

Civil Rights
12
Virginia Community Action Partnership Inc

Virginia community action partnership (vacap) is the statewide membership association for virginia's thirty-one non-profit and public community action agencies. vacaps mission is to build the capacity and competencies of virginias…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cornerstones Inc; the most unlike its peers is Parents of Autistic Children of Northern Virginia. 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ABUSED AND HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE INC: $271,000 · Human ServicesABUSED AND HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE INCNORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES INC: $26,500 · Human ServicesNORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES INC+3 more: $20,000 · Human Services+3 moreAutism Society of Northern Virginia: $20,500 · OtherAutism Soci…FRIENDS OF SHAPIRO DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER: $17,100 · OtherFRIENDS OF …KANKAKEE ASSOCIATION FOR MENTALLY RETARDED (KAMR): $2,000 · OtherMOBILE HOPE ASSOCIATION: $8,500 · Youth DevelopmentORGANIZATION FOR AUTISM RESEARCH: $5,000 · HealthPARENTS OF AUTISTIC CHILDREN OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA: $3,000 · HealthWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 · Education
Human Services$317,500Other$39,600Youth Development$8,500Health$8,000Education$3,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetABUSED AND HOMELESS CHILDREN'S REFUGE INC: $271,000 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetNORTHERN VIRGINIA FAMILY SERVICES INC: $26,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetAutism Society of Northern Virginia: $20,500 over 4y, 18% of budgetThe Barker Adoption Foundation: $10,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetMOBILE HOPE ASSOCIATION: $8,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetORGANIZATION FOR AUTISM RESEARCH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPOST PARTUM SUPPORT CHARLESTON: $5,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetCORNERSTONES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPARENTS OF AUTISTIC CHILDREN OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA: $3,000 over 1y, 47% 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.

Clark-Winchcole Found…United Way of the Nat…Dominion Energy Chari…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Network for GoodThe Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Clark-Winchcole FoundationMD13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Clark-Winchcole Foundation · United Way of the National Capital Area · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Durig Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Durig Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–30%
    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 12 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 Durig Family’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