Skip to content

· Private foundation

Grace E & Grenville B Lloyd 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.

$146k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$37k
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Animals$615kEnvironment$187kPhilanthropy$37k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $132k
$14,638
Median grant
4
States reached
$3.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$36,595
ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE$36,595
DORCHESTER PAWS$33,669
SC WILDLIFE FEDERATION$14,638
BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM$10,979
ACADIA WILDLIFE FDN$8,783
ANIMAL LOVERS OF EDISTO$5,124
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%EARTH JUSTICE: $45k → 10%DORCHESTER PAWS: $34k → 11%ANIMAL LOVERS OF EDISTO: $8k → 12%WINDY RIDGE RESCUE: $6k → 14%SC WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $15k → 16%BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $17k → 18%ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $59k → 14%MCKAMEY ANIMAL CENTER: $4k → 12%CAF AMERICA'S - TUSK TRUST LIMITED: $37k → 9%ACADIA WILDLIFE FDN: $23k → 11%EARTH JUSTICE: $40k → 10%DORCHESTER PAWS: $15k → 11%ANIMAL LOVERS OF EDISTO: $6k → 12%WINDY RIDGE RESCUE: $5k → 14%BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $17k → 18%ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $53k → 14%ACADIA WILDLIFE FDN: $22k → 11%EARTH JUSTICE: $37k → 10%DORCHESTER PAWS: $12k → 11%ANIMAL LOVERS OF EDISTO: $5k → 12%BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $16k → 18%ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $45k → 14%ACADIA WILDLIFE FDN: $18k → 11%EARTH JUSTICE: $30k → 10%DORCHESTER PAWS: $12k → 11%ANIMAL LOVERS OF EDISTO: $4k → 12%BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $15k → 18%ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $40k → 14%ACADIA WILDLIFE FDN: $9k → 11%EARTH JUSTICE: $24k → 10%DORCHESTER PAWS: $10k → 11%PET HELPERS: $10k → 12%BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $14k → 18%ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $39k → 14%EARTH JUSTICE: $10k → 10%DORCHESTER PAWS: $10k → 11%BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $13k → 18%ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $37k → 14%BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $11k → 18%ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $10k → 14%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$773k · 7 repeat orgs$65k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$773k
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+62%

Still filing today

71%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $51k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentOther
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

  • AW
    ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE
    7× · 2019–2025 · $283k · revenue +17%
  • EARTHJUSTICE
    6× · 2019–2024 · $187k · revenue +66%
  • BO
    BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM
    7× · 2019–2025 · $104k · revenue +6%

Funded once

  • PH
    PET HELPERS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +62%
  • AC
    ANIMAL CARE TRUST
    one grant, 2024 · $4k · revenue -2%
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 11 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $283,006 · AnimalsANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTEBIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $103,859 · AnimalsBIG OAKS RESCUE FARMDorchester Paws: $93,421 · AnimalsDorchester PawsACADIA WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $72,072 · AnimalsACADIA WILDLIFE FOUNDATION+2 more: $13,666 · AnimalsEARTHJUSTICE: $186,787 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICEIndividual grant recipient: $36,595 · OtherIndividual …ANIMAL LOVERS OF EDISTO: $23,261 · OtherANIMAL LOVE…SC WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $14,638 · OtherSC WILDLIFE…WINDY RIDGE RESCUE: $10,958 · OtherWINDY RIDGE…
Animals$566,024Environment$186,787Other$85,452

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 budgetANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $283,006 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $186,787 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBIG OAKS RESCUE FARM: $103,859 over 7y, 13% of budgetDorchester Paws: $93,421 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetACADIA WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $72,072 over 4y, 18% of budgetPET HELPERS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetANIMAL CARE TRUST: $3,666 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 ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds BIG OAKS RESCUE FARM ↗
  • Who funds Dorchester Paws ↗
  • Who funds ACADIA WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds PET HELPERS INC ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL CARE TRUST ↗

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.

Paypal Charitable Giving FundDC9.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · 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 Grace E & Grenville B Lloyd Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Grace E & Grenville B Lloyd Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Grace E & Grenville B Lloyd Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Grace E & Grenville B Lloyd Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 11 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 Grace E & Grenville B Lloyd’s filings →

    More from the funding graph