Skip to content
Harold Grant Hester and Patricia Marie Hester Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Harold Grant Hester and Patricia Marie Hester Family 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.

$85k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$28k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$299kEducation$116kYouth Development$111kReligion$71kHousing & Shelter$53kRecreation & Sports$45kHuman Services$31kInternational$19kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $75k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TERRACE OF LOS GATOS$28,324
HEARTS & MINDS ACTIVITY CENTER$27,000
PEO FOUNDATION$10,000
ONE STEP CLOSER$10,000
YOUTH ON COURSE$5,000
GLOBAL COMPUTER LITERACY$3,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
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 (FY19–19, $500) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HUNGER AT HOME: $500 → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
WI
IA
CA
CO
SC
OK
TX
FL
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.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$585k · 13 repeat orgs$168k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
26

Total granted

$585k
$125k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+48%

Still filing today

38%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $43k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthYouth DevelopmentEducationInternationalHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • CC
    CANCER CAREPOINT INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $163k · revenue +2%
  • HM
    HEARTS & MINDS ACTIVITY CENTER
    8× · 2018–2025 · $93k · revenue +62%
  • NF
    NCGA FOUNDATION
    7× · 2019–2025 · $55k · revenue +580%

Funded once

  • YL
    YOUNG LIFE--SAN JOSE
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • R
    REALOPTIONSgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +104%
  • AG
    ARUKAH GLOBAL INC
    one grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue -47%
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
Humangood Foundation West

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. continued…

Human Services
2
Humangood Fresno

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. continued…

Housing & Shelter
3
Humangood Cornerstone

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. continued…

Housing & Shelter
4
Humangood Nevada

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. because…

Housing & Shelter
5
American Academy of Neurology

The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.

Community Improvement
6
Humangood Washington

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. continued…

Health
7
Humangood Norcal

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you.because we…

Human Services
8
Humangood Socal

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you.because we…

Human Services
9
Humangood Foundation South

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. continued…

Human Services
10
Humangood Arizona Inc

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. continued…

Human Services
11
Humangood Affordable Housing

To advocate for, develop and operate quality housing and services for the aging and other people with limited resources and/or disabilities, enabling them to thrive in a positive, affordable and supportive community.

Human Services
12
Humangood Idaho

At humangood we believe everyone should have the opportunity to live with enthusiasm, confidence and security, regardless of physical, social, or economic circumstances. and when we say everyone, we mean everyone - including you. because…

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Water Missions International; the most unlike its peers is San Jose Sting Inc. 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

14 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. 14 of the 43 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST TIMOTHYS LUTHERAN CHURCH: $64,290 · OtherST TIMOTHYS LUTHERAN CHURCHONE STEP CLOSER: $57,750 · OtherONE STEP CLOSERNCGA FOUNDATION: $55,000 · OtherNCGA FOUNDATIONST TIM'S ACADEMY: $32,500 · OtherST TIM'S ACADEMYSJSU - DICK VERMEIL FUND: $30,000 · OtherSJSU - DICK VERMEIL FUNDTERRACE OF LOS GATOS: $28,324 · OtherTERRACE OF LOS GATOSYOUNG LIFE--SAN JOSE: $20,000 · OtherYOUNG LIFE--SAN JOSE+23 more: $78,772 · Other+23 moreCANCER CAREPOINT INC: $163,300 · HealthCANCER CAREPOINT INCHEARTS & MINDS ACTIVITY CENTER: $92,720 · HealthHEARTS & MINDS ACTIVITY CENTERREALOPTIONS: $15,000 · HealthREALOPTIONS+2 more: $3,000 · HealthHUMANGOOD: $43,348 · Housing & ShelterYOUNG LIFE: $33,680 · Youth DevelopmentSan Jose Sting Inc: $1,500 · Youth DevelopmentARUKAH GLOBAL INC: $15,000 · ReligionPEO Foundation: $10,000 · EducationFOLDS OF HONOR FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationWATER MISSIONS INTERNATIONAL: $3,500 · InternationalHUNGER AT HOME: $500 · Human Services
Other$366,636Health$274,020Housing & Shelter$43,348Youth Development$35,180Religion$15,000Education$15,000International$3,500Human Services$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 budgetCANCER CAREPOINT INC: $163,300 over 7y, 3.1% of budgetHEARTS & MINDS ACTIVITY CENTER: $92,720 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetNCGA FOUNDATION: $55,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetYOUNG LIFE: $33,680 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetREALOPTIONS: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetARUKAH GLOBAL INC: $15,000 over 1y, 7.1% of budgetPEO Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOLDS OF HONOR FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWATER MISSIONS INTERNATIONAL: $3,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSan Jose Sting Inc: $1,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetANGELS ON STAGE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetBRAIN SUPPORT NETWORK: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetHUNGER AT HOME: $500 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 CANCER CAREPOINT INC ↗
  • Who funds HEARTS & MINDS ACTIVITY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds NCGA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
  • Who funds REALOPTIONS ↗
  • Who funds ARUKAH GLOBAL INC ↗
  • Who funds PEO Foundation ↗
  • Who funds FOLDS OF HONOR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WATER MISSIONS INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds San Jose Sting Inc ↗
  • Who funds ANGELS ON STAGE ↗
  • Who funds BRAIN SUPPORT NETWORK ↗

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Network for GoodThe Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA14.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Harold Grant Hester and Patricia Marie Hester Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Harold Grant Hester and Patricia Marie Hester Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–25%
    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 43 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 Harold Grant Hester and Patricia Marie Hester 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