Skip to content
Fawcett Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Fawcett Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$34k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k12 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GRAND RAPIDS BALLET$10,000
DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF WEST MICHIGAN$5,000
PAN MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE$5,000
YMCA OF GREATER GRAND RAPIDS$2,000
KENT DISTRICT LIBRARY$2,000
COMMUNITY FOOD CLUB OF GRAND RAPIDS$2,000
JOHN BALL ZOO$2,000
BEER CITY DOG BISCUITS$1,000
LITERACY CENTER OF WEST MICHIGAN$1,000
NEW GROWTH PROJECT$1,000
AMPLIFY GR$1,000
GRACIOUS GROUNDS$1,000
GRAND CITY SHOW SKIERS$500
02The need
02

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 (FY25–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%YMCA OF GREATER GRAND RAPIDS: $2k → 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 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
Grand Traverse Area Community Living Management Corporation

BrickWays mission is to improve the lives of those with physical and developmental disabilities by providing housing options by adapting to their individual needs and by maximizing their potential in ways that integrate their lives with…

—
2
Rhode Island Developmental Disabilities Council Inc

Rhode Island Developmental Disabilities Council's mission is to promote changes wthin communities in Rhode Island that encourages, inspires and makes possible for individuals with disabilities to create, pursue and achieve lives that are…

Health
3
The Arc of Greensboro Inc

The Arc of Greensboro is committed to identifying and securing life-long opportunities for children & adults with intellectual & developmental disabilities. Through advocacy, services, programs, and education,The Arc supports individuals &…

—
4
Grand Rapids Opportunities for Women

Grow commits to a future where small business ownership can be realized as a pathway to wealth creation. we strive to provide capital and knowledge that is informed through curiosity and authentic relationships.

—
5
The Arc of Whatcom County

To improve the quality of life, increase the independence, and assure the full inclusion in the community of all persons with developmental disabilities.

Health
6
We Grow Dreams Inc

To provide people with disabilities the opportunity to lead fulfilling lives and to train and work in a supportive, safe and caring environment while producing and providing products and services to the community.

Employment
7
Grand Rapids Early Discovery Center

Our mission is to continuously expand the potential of children, the experiences of educators and the involvement of parents within the diverse community of grand rapids, mi

Human Services
8
Development in Gardening

Development in Gardening is improving the nutrition and livelihoods of some of the world's most uniquely marginalized people by teaching them to plant regenerative gardens that grow health, wealth, and a sense of belonging.

Community Improvement
9
Arins Good Girl Dog Treats Llc

Our vision is a meaningful job for everyone where all individuals regardless of ability have the opportunity to thrive in the workplace. Our mission is to cultivate thriving work environments with purpose and potential for individuals with…

Employment
10
LArche Portland

At l'arche portland people with and without developmental disabilities create home and build community together. we nurture long-term mutual relationships that reveal the gifts of people with developmental disabilities. in doing so we…

Human Services
11
Disability Belongs

Disability belongs drives cultural and policy change to ensure our full representation and influence, creating a more accessible, equitable, and inclusive society.

Human Services
12
Goodwill's Green Works Inc

The mission of goodwill's green works, inc. is to provide training and develop the skills of people with employment challenges to enable them to work. environmentally friendly services are provided to customers while creating job…

Employment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Amplify Gr; the most unlike its peers is The Young Men's Christian Association of Greater Grand Rapids (3019). Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

10 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. 10 of the 13 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF WEST MICHIGAN: $5,000 · OtherDOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF WEST MICHIGANPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $5,000 · OtherPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INCCOMMUNITY FOOD CLUB OF GRAND RAPIDS: $2,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY FOOD CLUB OF GRAND RAPIDSKENT DISTRICT LIBRARY: $2,000 · OtherKENT DISTRICT LIBRARYAMPLIFY GR: $1,000 · OtherAMPLIFY GRBEER CITY DOG BISCUITS: $1,000 · OtherBEER CITY DOG BISCUITS+1 more: $500 · OtherGRAND RAPIDS BALLET: $10,000 · Arts & CultureGRAND RAPIDS BALLETJOHN BALL ZOO: $2,000 · AnimalsThe Young Men's Christian Association of Greater Grand Rapids (3019): $2,000 · Human ServicesLiteracy Center of West Michigan: $1,000 · EducationGRACIOUS GROUNDS INC: $1,000 · PhilanthropyNEW GROWTH PROJECT: $1,000 · Employment
Other$16,500Arts & Culture$10,000Animals$2,000Human Services$2,000Education$1,000Philanthropy$1,000Employment$1,000

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 budgetGRAND RAPIDS BALLET: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Young Men's Christian Association of Greater Grand Rapids (3019): $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLiteracy Center of West Michigan: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGRACIOUS GROUNDS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEW GROWTH PROJECT: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBEER CITY DOG BISCUITS: $1,000 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.

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.

Frey FoundationGrand Rapids Communit…The Meijer FoundationPeter C & Emajean Coo…Steve & Amy Van Andel…Baird Foundation IncJpmorgan Chase Founda…Natl Christian Charit…The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Frey FoundationMI19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Frey Foundation · Grand Rapids Community Foundation · The Meijer Foundation · Peter C & Emajean Cook Foundation · Steve & Amy Van Andel Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Fawcett Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fawcett Family 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%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 13 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 Fawcett Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home