Skip to content
Ford Family Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ford Family Charitable 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.

$16k
Granted FY2022
15
Grants FY2022
3
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2022.

Health$23kHuman Services$6kYouth Development$4kAnimals$4kHousing & Shelter$2kCivil Rights$500Philanthropy$500Other$0
02FY2022 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$378k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
North Oaks Foundation$1,500
Strengthening Outcomes with Autism$1,500
Born with Angel Wings$1,500
Ginger Ford Nortshore Fuller Center$1,500
St Jude Children Hospital$1,500
Cancer Foundation of New Mexico$1,500
TARC$1,000
Equine Advocacy of Louisiana$1,000
Star Legacy Foundation$1,000
Options$1,000
The Link Stryjewski Foundation$1,000
Boy Scouts of America$500
Individual grant recipient$500
Lakeview Foundation$500
Espanola Valley Humane Society$500
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 (FY21–22, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Options: $2k → 20%Options: $1k → 20%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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$30k · 14 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2022, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
5

Total granted

$30k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+728%

Still filing today

57%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22
HealthAnimalsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • SO
    Strengthening Outcomes with Autism Resources
    2× · 2021–2022 · $3k · revenue +28%
  • NO
    North Oaks Foundation
    2× · 2021–2022 · $3k · revenue +50%
  • CF
    CANCER FOUNDATION FOR NEW MEXICO
    2× · 2021–2022 · $3k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • LH
    Lakeview Hospital Foundation
    one grant, 2020 · $4k
  • MB
    MARY BIRD PERKINS CANCER CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +728%
  • TH
    TANGI HUMANE SOCIETY
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
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
Louisiana Cancer Foundation for Research and Education Inc

To improve opportunities for cancer research in Louisiana and enhance educational efforts regarding prevention and control over cancer.

Health
2
Lsu Research Foundation
Community Improvement
3
Louisiana Perinatal Justice Allianc

The purpose and mission of the louisiana perinatal justice alliance is to improve the reproductive care and health outcomes for all louisiana families, to promote evidence-based maternal and infant care, to advocate for parenting families,…

Health
4
Orleans County Child Advocacy Center Inc
Health
5
Heart of Louisiana Humane Society
Animals
6
Orleans Sheriff's Office Foundation
Crime & Legal
7
Louisiana-Mississippi Hospice and Palliative Care Organization Inc

To provide public awareness, education and technical assistance regarding end-of-life care, as well as advocacy for terminally ill and bereaved persons, striving to continually improve the quality of end-of-life care in Louisiana and…

Human Services
8
Care Net Center of Greater Orleans

Pregnancy counseling

Unclassified
9
Spirit of Charity Foundation

It is the mission of the spirit of charity foundation to support and facilitate patient-centered care, actively promote health and wellness and to advance medical research and education through fundraising efforts for the benefit of umcno,…

Philanthropy
10
Lsu Health Foundation New Orleans

The mission of the foundation is to inspire donors to invest in the lsu health sciences center - new orleans ("hsc-no") and its future, to properly steward those contributions, and to help meet the ever evolving needs of the lsuhsc-no by…

Health
11
Southwest Louisiana Area Health Education Center Foundation

To improve health status through access to information, education, & health services.

Health
12
The Arc of Louisiana

The arc of louisiana advocates for and with individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tarc Inc; the most unlike its peers is Equine Advocacy of Louisiana. 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

11 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. 11 of the 23 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Ginger Ford Nortshore Fuller Center: $4,500 · OtherGinger Ford Nortshore Fuller CenterLakeview Hospital Foundation: $3,914 · OtherLakeview Hospital FoundationBorn with Angel Wings: $3,000 · OtherBorn with Angel WingsTARC INC: $2,000 · OtherTARC INCBoy Scouts of America: $1,500 · OtherBoy Scouts of AmericaSt Jude Children Hospital: $1,500 · OtherSt Jude Children HospitalMarines Toys for Tots: $1,000 · OtherFriends of Childrens Hospital: $1,000 · OtherEQUINE ADVOCACY OF LOUISIANA: $1,000 · OtherTANGI HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,000 · Other+4 more: $2,000 · Other+4 moreStrengthening Outcomes with Autism Resources: $2,500 · HealthStrengthening Outcomes with Autis…North Oaks Foundation: $2,500 · HealthNorth Oaks FoundationCANCER FOUNDATION FOR NEW MEXICO: $2,500 · HealthCANCER FOUNDATION FOR NEW MEXICOSTAR LEGACY FOUNDATION: $2,000 · HealthSTAR LEGACY FOUNDATIONMARY BIRD PERKINS CANCER CENTER: $1,500 · HealthMARY BIRD PERKINS CANCER CENTERST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $1,000 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPI…OPTIONS INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesLINK STRYJEWSKI FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 · PhilanthropyESPANOLA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,500 · Animals
Other$22,414Health$12,000Human Services$2,500Philanthropy$2,000Animals$1,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetStrengthening Outcomes with Autism Resources: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetOPTIONS INC: $2,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNorth Oaks Foundation: $2,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCANCER FOUNDATION FOR NEW MEXICO: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTARC INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSTAR LEGACY FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLINK STRYJEWSKI FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 2y, 31% of budgetESPANOLA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMARY BIRD PERKINS CANCER CENTER: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% 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 Strengthening Outcomes with Autism Resources ↗
  • Who funds OPTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds North Oaks Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CANCER FOUNDATION FOR NEW MEXICO ↗
  • Who funds TARC INC ↗
  • Who funds STAR LEGACY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LINK STRYJEWSKI FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ESPANOLA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds MARY BIRD PERKINS CANCER CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds EQUINE ADVOCACY OF LOUISIANA ↗

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.

Shell USA Company Fou…Arthur J Gallagher Fo…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Paypal Charitable Giv…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Shell USA Company FoundationTX13.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Shell USA Company Foundation · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving 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 Ford Family Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ford Family Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    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 23 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ford 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