· Private foundation
Ernest G & Cecil B Williams 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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 61% of ERNEST G & CECIL B WILLIAMS FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k10 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $36k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DCH FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA | $10,750 |
| ST LUKE EPISCOPAL CHURCH | $10,100 |
| CANTERBURY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH | $6,915 |
| THE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF TEXAS | $5,000 |
| CHILDRENS HEALTH FOUNDATION | $2,400 |
| LINLY HEFLIN SCHOLARSHIP FUND | $1,000 |
| UNLESS U | $1,000 |
| BANKS ACADEMY | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $500 |
| LOVE IN THE NAME OF CHRIST | $100 |
| DECATUR PUBLIC LIBRARY | $100 |
| HEIGHTS NATIONAL ALUMNI ASSOCIATION | $100 |
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, $24k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 87% 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 +46% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
32 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 5 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, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
- CCARRYWELL3× · 2020–2023 · $25k · revenue +0%
- PPPRESCHOOL PARTNERS4× · 2018–2022 · $11k · revenue +64%
- UUUNLESS U INC8× · 2018–2025 · $8k · revenue +520%
Funded once
- TUTHE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA PRESIDENT'S CLUBone grant, 2020 · $8k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAMone grant, 2023 · $5k
- CTCRIMSON TIDE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2017 · $5k
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.
Encourage and enhance advocacy and family support services on behalf of individuals suffering from mental illness.
The Urology Health Foundation is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization founded in 2003 by Birmingham urologist Dr. Thomas E. Moody. Its purposes are to educate physicians and other medical professionals in new techniques and procedures being…
To improve lives by mobilizing the caring power of the community
The Alabama A&M University Foundation was established to receive, hold, invest, manage, use, and administer property of all kinds, whether given absolutely or in trust, for the benefit of Alabama A&M University and its educational,…
Oversee and facilitate the collection, pasteurization, and distribution of human milk. Provide training and education for healthcare providers and community members about the health importance of human milk for neonates and infants.
To further the image of medicine through financial support for health education programs and projects
The organization pledges to provide quality programs, service, and technology to meet the unique physical, emotional, and spiritual needs of the terminally ill and their families, and to educate the community about end of life issues.
We exist to provide quality, culturally competent primary and preventive health services to the residents of southeast alabama without regard to their ability to pay.
Autauga Interfaith Care Center, Inc. is a cooperative outreach ministry of Christian churches and individuals in Autauga County, Alabama.
The mission of Children's of Alabama is to provide the finest pediatric health services to all children in an environment that fosters excellence in research and medical education. Children's will be an advocate for all children and work…
Repairing homes, revitalizing communities and rebuilding lives.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Glenwood Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Heart Association Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 36 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 12% of your grantees by number, and just 8% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
28 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. 28 of the 77 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 DCH Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CARRYWELL ↗
- Who funds PRESCHOOL PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds UNLESS U INC ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDRY MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds Camp Nakanawa ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds Quarterbacking Children's Health Foundation ↗
- Who funds Kings Home Inc ↗
- Who funds THE EXCEPTIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOSPICE OF WEST ALABAMA INC ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds STUDIO BY THE TRACKS INC ↗
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 Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham · Alabama Power Foundation Inc · The Daniel Foundation of Alabama · Altecstyslinger Foundation · Debardeleben Foundation Inc · Hill Crest Foundation Inc · Dunn-French Foundation · Susan Mott Webb Charitable Trust · Cooper Family Foundation · Nall-Whatley Foundation · The Michael D and Netagene R Thompson Fo · The Faulkner Family Foundation
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 Ernest G & Cecil B Williams 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.