· Private foundation
Edward J and Lanelle B Robson Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $6k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $155k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Loyola Academy CO Brophy College Pr | $105,000 |
| Barrow Neurological Foundation | $50,000 |
| Phoenix Children's Hospital Foundat | $10,000 |
| Sacred Heart Jesuit-Father Tom Alex | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| Boys Hope Girls Hope of Arizona | $1,000 |
| Saddlebrooke Rotary Club Foundation | $1,000 |
| Fresh Start Womens Foundation | $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 (FY17–25, $75k) 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 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.
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 +11% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $107k 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
- ADARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS FOUNDATIONINC5× · 2017–2024 · $83k · revenue +201%
- AHAmerican Heart Association Inc2× · 2020–2023 · $57k · revenue +53%
- FSFRESH START WOMEN'S FOUNDATION4× · 2017–2025 · $26k · revenue +114%
Funded once
University of Arizona Foundationone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +12%- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $25k
- CICHILDHELP INCone grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -6%
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.
Phoenix children's hospital foundation supports phoenix children's hospital through fundraising ensuring that the hospital continues to stay on the leading edge of pediatric medicine and is equipped to fulfill its mission to advance hope,…
To celebrate excellence and cultivate opportunity in pk-12th grade arizona public education.
Organization mission solutions for an independent arizona envisions an arizona addresses its most pressing issues. independent arizona will identify, unite, and engage voters who want to elect people who will find common ground to serve…
Azaap is committed to improving the health of arizona children and supporting the pediatric professionals who care for them.
To advance hope, healing and the best healthcare for children and their families.
CSCAZ uplifts and strengthens people impacted by cancer by providing support, fostering compassionate communities, and breaking down barriers to care.
Honorhealth's mission is to improve the health and well-being of those we serve.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Saguaros Childrens Charities and the most unlike its peers is Gk Legacy Foundation. 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 32 years old; the field is 11. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 30% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 17% 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.
36 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 36 of the 62 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 ARIZONA DIAMONDBACKS FOUNDATIONINC ↗
- Who funds BARROW NEUROLOGICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds University of Arizona Foundation ↗
- Who funds Hope Ignites Phoenix ↗
- Who funds FRESH START WOMEN'S FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GK LEGACY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Bridgton Academy ↗
- Who funds CHILDHELP INC ↗
- Who funds BARRY GOLDWATER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds JOE FOSS INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CHECKERED FLAG RUN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds A FOR ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds HONORING AMERICAS VETERANS ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF VISITORS ↗
- Who funds FIGHTER COUNTRY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MARICOPA TRAIL & PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ARIZONA FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds KEOGH HEALTH CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds FIRST PLACE AZ ↗
- Who funds VALLEY LEADERSHIP CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Open Hearts Family Wellness ↗
- Who funds Rotary Club of Sun Lakes AZ ↗
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: Arizona Community Foundation · Virginia G Piper Charitable Trust · American Express Foundation · Thunderbirds Charities · The Foundation for Community and Health Advancement · The Thunderbirds · BHHS Legacy Foundation · Phoenix Suns Charities Inc · Arizona Diamondbacks Foundationinc · Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust · Mother's Grace · Interest Ministries
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 Edward J and Lanelle B Robson 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.
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 Edward J and Lanelle B Robson Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Edward J and Lanelle B Robson 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.