Skip to content

· Private foundation

Elizabeth Ann Parkman Foundation

Its FY2018 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$729k
Granted FY2018
12
Grants FY2018
2
States reached
$156k
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, FY2017 to 2018.

Education$360kReligion$329kHuman Services$230kPhilanthropy$210kEnvironment$143kHealth$123kAnimals$112kRecreation & Sports$12k
02FY2018 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2018

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $100k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $628k
$60,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CATHOLIC FOUNDATION FOR THE DIOCESE OF TUCSON$156,354
ST ELIZABETH'S HEALTH CENTER$122,815
HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE WHITE MOUNTAINS$104,000
WHITE MOUNTAIN NATURE CENTER$99,987
SACRED HEART SCHOOLS$85,000
SANTA RITA ABBEY$60,000
GOOD SHEPHERD CENTER CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF HOLBROOK$35,000
SALPOINTE CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL$25,000
WHITE MOUNTAIN CATHOLIC CHARITIES$20,000
SAFE HOUSE OF THE DESERT$10,000
KRAEMER ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION$10,000
ANIMAL HOSPITAL OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS$1,000
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 (FY17–18, $130k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%AVIVA CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $100k → 15%SAFE HOUSE OF THE DESERT: $20k → 11%SAFE HOUSE OF THE DESERT: $10k → 11%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.

25%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$385k · 3 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
10

Total granted

$385k
$500k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
+90%

Still filing today

33%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 13% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $634k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18
AnimalsHuman 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

  • SC
    SALPOINTE CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL
    2× · 2017–2018 · $275k
  • SR
    SANTA RITA ABBEY INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $80k
  • OS
    OPERATION SAFE HOUSE INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $30k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • CC
    Catholic Community Services Foundation Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $200k · revenue +760%
  • AC
    AVIVA CHILDREN'S SERVICESgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue +90%
  • SP
    ST PETER'S CATHOLIC CHURCH
    one grant, 2017 · $93k
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
Pawsitively Cats Inc

Pawsitively cats is a no-kill cat shelter in tucson for homeless cats that provides compassionate care until a loving permanent home can be found. pawsitively cats also promotes trap, neuter and release (tnr) for feral cats. pawsitively…

Animals
2
Humane Society of Southern Arizona

To compassionately serve pets and the people who love them.

Animals
3
Friends of the Palm SpringsAnimal Shelter

We are dedicated to building a community responsible for pet stewardship and humane treatment of animals.

Animals
4
Paws and Claws Animal Shelter
Animals
5
Ark-Valley Humane Society Inc

Ark-Valley Humane Society's (AVHS) Mission is ensuring the welfare of companion animals through compassion and care. AVHS operated an open-admission animal shelter for Chaffee County, Colorado.

Animals
6
Arizona Desert Rotti & Pals Rescue Inc

Take dogs from local shelters, rehabilitate them medically if necessary, care for and get the pet ready for adoption into a family. Hold adoption events, adoption screenings, and transportation if needed.

Animals
7
Arizona Animal Rescue Mission

Keep families and pets together

Animals
8
Humane Society of the Desert Orphan Pet Oasis

We are a no-kill organization that provides low cost medical care and placment . on january 2,2024 the hospital , land and associated assets were transfered to the city of desert hot springs.the city did not have a facility to care for…

Animals
9
Yavapai Humane Trappers Animal Search

Animal search and rescue, vetting, rehome and placement of unwanted and abandoned pets, primarily in northern arizona.sponsors a foster pet program and overpopulation program of spay and neuter.

Animals
10
Save the Cats Arizona

No-kill, cage free cat sanctuary with adoption

Animals
11
Cochise County Humane Society Inc

To reduce the problem of unexpected Dogs and Cats in Cochise County by offering Spay and Neuter programs. To provide financial assistance to Elderly, Low Income and Veteran families for their pets for the programs we offer. To provide…

Animals
12
Central Arizona Animal Rescue Inc

Central Arizona Animal Rescue serves the community by rescuing, caring for, rehabilitating and placing rescued animals with new owners that would otherwise be euthanized. We spay or neuter all animals that are adopted, ending the cycle of…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save-a-Pet Inc; the most unlike its peers is Kraemer Endowment Foundation Inc. 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

8 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. 8 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SALPOINTE CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL: $275,000 · OtherSALPOINTE CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOLCatholic Community Services Foundation Inc: $200,000 · OtherCatholic Community Services Foundation IncCATHOLIC FOUNDATION FOR THE DIOCESE OF TUCSON: $156,354 · OtherCATHOLIC FOUNDATION FOR THE DIOCESE OF TUCSONST ELIZABETH'S HEALTH CENTER: $122,815 · OtherST ELIZABETH'S HEALTH CENTERWHITE MOUNTAIN NATURE CENTER: $99,987 · OtherWHITE MOUNTAIN NATURE CENTERST PETER'S CATHOLIC CHURCH: $93,000 · OtherST PETER'S CATHOLIC CHURCHSACRED HEART SCHOOLS ATHERTON: $85,000 · OtherSACRED HEART SCHOOLS ATHERTONSANTA RITA ABBEY INC: $80,000 · OtherSANTA RITA ABBEY INCWHITE MOUNTAINS NATURE CENTER: $43,250 · Other+7 more: $103,300 · Other+7 moreAVIVA CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $100,000 · Human ServicesAVIVA CHI…OPERATION SAFE HOUSE INC: $30,000 · Human ServicesOPERATION…HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE WT MTNS: $104,000 · AnimalsPAWS & HEARTS: $10,000 · AnimalsSAVE-A-PET INC: $5,000 · AnimalsLIONS CAMP TATIYEE INC: $11,513 · Recreation & Sports
Other$1,258,706Human Services$130,000Animals$119,000Recreation & Sports$11,513

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF THE WT MTNS: $104,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetAVIVA CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $100,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetOPERATION SAFE HOUSE INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetPAWS & HEARTS: $10,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetKRAEMER ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetSAVE-A-PET INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 Catholic Community Services Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE WT MTNS ↗
  • Who funds AVIVA CHILDREN'S SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds OPERATION SAFE HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds LIONS CAMP TATIYEE INC ↗
  • Who funds PAWS & HEARTS ↗
  • Who funds KRAEMER ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SAVE-A-PET INC ↗

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.

United Way of Tucson and Southern Arizona IncAZ13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Tucson and Southern Arizona Inc · Arizona Community Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Elizabeth Ann Parkman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Elizabeth Ann Parkman Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    0get 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 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 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Elizabeth Ann Parkman’s filings →

    More from the funding graph