Skip to content

· Private foundation

E Eugene Carter Foundation

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.

$387k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$83k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$2.0MRecreation & Sports$70kHuman Services$18k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $106k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $281k
$58,400
Median grant
6
States reached
$3.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY$83,000
UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS$80,000
Individual grant recipient$60,000
UMASS LOWELL$58,400
UNIVERSITY OF ILLIONOIS CHICAGO$47,000
Individual grant recipient$30,000
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO$28,846
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 (FY20–20, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Iona Senior Services and other DC: $18k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
MA
CO
VA
AZ
NM
KS
NC
DC
OK
TX
FL
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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 10 repeat orgs$498k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
8

Total granted

$1.6M
$321k

Still filing today

0%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $177k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesRecreation & 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

  • NM
    NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2020–2025 · $322k
  • TB
    THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
    3× · 2021–2023 · $276k
  • UO
    University of Texas San Antonio
    4× · 2020–2023 · $243k

Funded once

  • NC
    NORTH CAROLINA STATE
    one grant, 2021 · $70k · revenue +13% · 39% of their budget
  • WS
    Wichita State Universiyt
    one grant, 2021 · $60k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $60k
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
04the grantee network

2 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. 2 of the 22 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
2/2
Grantees still filing
2/2
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITY: $322,000 · OtherNEW MEXICO STATE UNIVERSITYTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: $276,000 · OtherTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOISUniversity of Texas San Antonio: $242,856 · OtherUniversity of Texas San AntonioUniversity of Oklahoma: $191,807 · OtherUniversity of OklahomaColorado School of Mines: $120,454 · OtherColorado School of MinesUniversity of Massachusetts Lowell: $100,432 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF KANSAS: $100,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF ILLIONOIS CHICAGO: $90,525 · OtherVirginia Commonwealth Univ: $80,000 · Other+11 more: $475,980 · Other+11 moreNORTH CAROLINA STATE: $70,000 · Recreation & SportsIona Senior Services: $18,000 · Human Services
Other$2,000,054Recreation & Sports$70,000Human Services$18,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNORTH CAROLINA STATE: $70,000 over 1y, 39% of budgetIona Senior Services: $18,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds NORTH CAROLINA STATE ↗
  • Who funds Iona Senior Services ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization E Eugene Carter Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from E Eugene Carter Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 22 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 E Eugene Carter’s filings →

    More from the funding graph