· Private foundation
Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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 $10k40 grants · $192k
- $10k–50k64 grants · $720k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Chicago Architecture Biennial | $75,000 |
| Ying Lu Lucy Wang | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| The Jewish Museum | $20,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| Carnegie Museum of Art | $15,000 |
| Tom Carruthers & Jennifer Newsom | $15,000 |
| Prospect New Orleans (US Biennials Inc) | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| A Project 83 Inc | $15,000 |
| The Center for Independent Documentary | $12,500 |
| Lydia Kallipoliti & Areti Markopoulou | $12,500 |
| University of Washington | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $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 (FY20–24, $335k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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 +38% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
67 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2024, 51 since wound down; 89 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, 22% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $773k 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
- ACANYONE CORPORATION4× · 2019–2022 · $55k · revenue +62%
- LCLandmark Columbus Foundation Inc3× · 2019–2023 · $40k · revenue +57%
- DHDesign History Foundation Inc3× · 2020–2022 · $35k · revenue +34%
Funded once
- SSPACESone grant, 2023 · $35k · revenue -68%
- MSMADISON SQUARE PARK CONSERVANCY INCone grant, 2019 · $30k · revenue +19%
- TSThe Serpentine Trustone grant, 2020 · $25k
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.
To inspire, educate and cultivate curiosity through great works of art.
To collect, display and interpret objects in craft art and design.
A center for exhibitions, information, and documentation about living artists since 1977, which continues to be a place of experimentation and a hub of new art and new ideas.
Home to the art and legacy of the american painter clyfford still, we invite all to explore the potential of individual creative endeavor.
The mission of the national academy of design is to promote the fine arts in america through exhibition and education.
The Morgan Library & Museum celebrates and shares the history and process of human creativity from antiquity to the present day through the preservation, study, and interpretation of a dynamic and growing collection.
The institute of contemporary art, miami (ica miami), is dedicated to promoting the work of contemporary artists, and to the exchange of art and ideas throughout the miami region and internationally. through an energetic calendar of…
Artpace san antonio is a nonprofit residency program which supports texas, national, and international artists in the creation of new art. see schedule o for continuation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Center for Architecture Inc and the most unlike its peers is Terreform Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 35 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
80 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. 80 of the 549 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 CHICAGO ARCHITECTURE BIENNIAL INC ↗
- Who funds Chicago Architecture Foundation ↗
- Who funds STOREFRONT FOR ART AND ARCHITECTURE INC ↗
- Who funds ANYONE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION OF ARCHITECTURE ORGANIZATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds Museum of Modern Art ↗
- Who funds Landmark Columbus Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds SPACES ↗
- Who funds LAMPO INC ↗
- Who funds Design History Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds A Project 83 Inc ↗
- Who funds MADISON SQUARE PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds THE SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE ↗
- Who funds THE ARCHITECTURAL LEAGUE OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds ELMHURST ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds QUEENS MUSEUM OF ART ↗
- Who funds SOCIETY OF ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIANS ↗
- Who funds THE FORUM FOR URBAN DESIGN ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds TERREFORM 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: Terra Foundation for American Art · The Andrew W Mellon Foundation · The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc · The Jaffe Family Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Ford Foundation · The J Paul Getty Trust · Kpf Foundation Co Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates PC · The Daniel and Estrellita Brodsky Family Foundation · Teiger Foundation · Michael Asher Foundation · Jahn 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 Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts 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.
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- The Center for Independent Documentary Inc — 6% 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.