· Private foundation
Eagle Foundation
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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k17 grants · $390k
- $50k–250k16 grants · $1.7M
- $250k+32 grants · $39M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Creighton University - ARRUPE | $6,000,000 |
| Catholic Relief Services Pathways Latin America | $4,250,000 |
| Partners in Health Buraro Hospital Rwanda | $4,000,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $4,000,000 |
| Mercy Corps Dreams Tanzania | $2,700,000 |
| World Vision Undesignated FOSTER Grant | $1,500,000 |
| Catholic Relief Services Undesignated FOSTER Grant | $1,500,000 |
| Root Capital | $1,500,000 |
| Parters in Health Undesignated FOSTER Grant | $1,250,000 |
| Mercy Corps Undesignated FOSTER Grant | $1,000,000 |
| Heifer International BSLD-India | $1,000,000 |
| International Rescue Committee | $1,000,000 |
| Cross Catholic Outreach | $1,000,000 |
| CURE International | $1,000,000 |
| Educate Uganda | $550,000 |
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 (FY19–24, $5.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 94% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +22% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
69 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2024, 32 since wound down; 28 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24M 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
PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION7× · 2017–2023 · $13M · revenue +120%- RCROOT CAPITAL INC7× · 2017–2024 · $7.3M · revenue +8%
- MCMercy Corps5× · 2018–2023 · $5.7M · revenue +22%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $6.0M
- CUCreighton University - ARRUPE Scholarsone grant, 2021 · $5.0M
- HIHeifer Internationalone grant, 2022 · $2.0M
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.
See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.
Charity: water is a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe water to people around the world. continued on schedule o.
Zoe Empowers is a global network of local organizations throughout Africa and India providing a replicable and scalable framework whereby youth led or resourced families are provided the training, resources, and community support to become…
Empowering Lives International (ELI) ignites world changers. We equip families and orphans to crush poverty, embrace Christ, and share their transformation with others through their God-honoring income, their deepening relationship with…
The purpose of world hope international, inc. (whi) includes providing assistance to economically disadvantaged people through long-term social transformation projects, including anti-trafficking protection, clean water, economic…
For over 60 years, counterpart international has partnered with communities worldwide to turn local ideas into lasting solutions, connecting local vision with global opportunity. (continued on schedule o)we believe people closest to the…
The mission of Splash International and its subsidiaries is to ensure clean water for children. Splash partners with governments and local organizations to deliver sustainable water, sanitation, hygiene, and menstrual health programs in…
Health Poverty Action USA acts in solidarity with health workers, activists & communities worldwide to improve health & challenge the causes of poverty. We do this in 3 distinct ways: 1. We approach health as an issue of social justice. We…
The organization is guided by the simple premise that groups of committed individuals can reach across national boundaries to make a dramatic difference in the lives of others. the power of this premise has been demonstrated by the extent…
The organization's mission is to build partnerships to enhance compassionate care globally. we are dedicated to improving access to hospice and palliative care worldwide.
Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…
We are a global Christian organization committed to partnering with indigenous peoples, local churches, and community-based organizations to make disciples of Jesus Christ and help end extreme poverty. We serve indigenous pygmies,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Catholic Medical Mission Board Inc and the most unlike its peers is Global Spine Outreach. 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 25 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) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
65 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. 65 of the 138 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 PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
- Who funds ROOT CAPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds Mercy Corps ↗
- Who funds HEIFER PROJECT INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds WATER FOR PEOPLE ↗
- Who funds GIVEDIRECTLY INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds LIVING GOODS ↗
- Who funds Unbound ↗
- Who funds EDUCATE UGANDA ↗
- Who funds CURE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S SCHOLARSHIP FUND OF OMAHA ↗
- Who funds ENGINEERS WITHOUT BORDERS-USAINC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC MEDICAL MISSION BOARD INC ↗
- Who funds Creighton University ↗
- Who funds FAITH IN PRACTICE ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
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 Lozier Foundation · The Charles and Mary Heider Family Foundation · The Sherwood Foundation · Nebraska Community Foundation · The Hawks Foundation · Dovetail Impact Foundation (Fka David Weekley Family Foundation) · Robert B Daugherty Foundation · Lincoln Community Foundation Inc · Keith Margareth and Sandra Smith Foundation · Greater Omaha Packing Co Foundation · Dennis & Ellin Murphy Foundation · Jc & Jessie Seacrest Family Fndtn First Nebraska Trust Co Trustee
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 Eagle 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.
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- Root Capital Inc — 9% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Eagle Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Eagle Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.