· Private foundation
Fred and Mary Godley Family Foundation
Its FY2024 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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $675k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FRIENDS CENTER FOR CHILDREN | $200,000 |
| LEAP INC | $150,000 |
| CROSBY FUND FOR HAITIAN EDUCATION | $100,000 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| EARTHJUSTICE | $75,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTH NE | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $20,000 |
| LYME LAND CONSERVATION TRUST | $10,000 |
| GENERATION WEST VIRGINIA | $10,000 |
| NAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS | $10,000 |
| CONNECTICUT AUDUBON SOCIETY | $10,000 |
| INTEGRATED REFUGEE IMMIGRANT SER | $10,000 |
| HEARTLAND FUND | $10,000 |
| SHORELINE SOUPO KITCHENS PANTRIES | $10,000 |
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 (FY24–24, $200k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +27% since the first grant, against -17% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $225k 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
- CFCROSBY FUND FOR HAITIAN EDUC INC8× · 2017–2024 · $735k · revenue +41%
- LLLYME LAND CONSERVATION TRUST INC8× · 2017–2024 · $415k · revenue +27%
EARTHJUSTICE7× · 2018–2024 · $325k · revenue +114%
Funded once
- TOTOWN OF LYMEone grant, 2019 · $100k
EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVEone grant, 2021 · $35k · revenue -40%- FFFREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue -14%
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.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
To effectively and efficiently mitigate risks to the reliability and security of the western interconnection's bulk power system.
Council for court excellence's (cce's) mission is to bring people together to conduct research, educate, and advocate to make d.c.'s unique legal systems more just, equitable, and accountable to the community.
Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.
Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…
The adirondack council ensures the ecological integrity (clean water and air, wildlife habitat, etc.), wild character (solitude, scenic beauty, etc.), and vibrant communities of new york's six-million-acre adirondack park. the adirondack…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…
See schedule ouniversity corporation for atmospheric research (ucar), on behalf of, and in cooperation with its member university members, is engaged in the management of long-term atmospheric and related research and educational…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sierra Club Foundation and the most unlike its peers is MacCurdy Salisbury Educational 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.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 21. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 33 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 CROSBY FUND FOR HAITIAN EDUC INC ↗
- Who funds LYME LAND CONSERVATION TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds MacCurdy Salisbury Educational Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CONNECTICUT AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS CENTER FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds CAMP CLAIRE INC ↗
- Who funds GENERATION WEST VIRGINIA INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds BUTTERNUT VALLEY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANIZING ↗
- Who funds A PLACE CALLED HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CREATIVE ARTS WORKSHOP INC ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
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 Pfizer Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Fred and Mary Godley Family 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Friends Center for Children Inc — 21% of income from government
- Lyme Land Conservation Trust Inc — 16% of income from government
- Connecticut Audubon Society Inc — 1% of income from government
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.