Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Harold S Hansen & Naomi H Bodenstab 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.

$24k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 74% of HAROLD S HANSEN & NAOMI H BODENSTAB CHARITABLE FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$632k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTHWEST MICHIGAN BALLET THEATRE$15,000
ST PAUL LUTHERAN SCHOOL CHICAGO$5,000
PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER$2,800
TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH$1,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–25, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $5k → 13%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 13%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 13%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 13%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 13%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $2k → 13%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $2k → 13%PLEASANT VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER: $2k → 13%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 59% of Harold S Hansen & Naomi H Bodenstab Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 56% of the giving stays in MI; read by stated purpose it is 31% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Harold S Hansen & Naomi H Bodenstab Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$500k · 9 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
8

Total granted

$500k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-31%
+144%

Still filing today

56%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Arts & CultureReligionHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsEducationFood & NutritionOther

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

  • SP
    ST PAUL LUTHERAN SCHOOL CHICAGO
    9× · 2017–2025 · $223k
  • GT
    GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL CONSER
    4× · 2017–2024 · $141k
  • LC
    LUTHERAN CAMP ASSOCIATION
    3× · 2017–2020 · $57k · revenue -31%

Funded once

  • BB
    BIG BROTHER BIG SISTERS
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
  • PF
    PROJECT FEED THE KIDS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue +47%
  • CU
    CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY ANN ARBOR
    one grant, 2024 · $3k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Charlevoix Historical Society

To preserve historical information, restore and maintain historical buildings, and promote historical education.

2
Pine Mountain Music Festival

To produce superb classical music in michigan's upper peninsula.

Arts & Culture
3
Traverse City Dance Project

The Corporation shall have the purpose of supporting the creation and promotion of the arts, including visual and performance art, and providing education regarding the arts. The purposes include: to build and stage a bold mixture of new…

Arts & Culture
4
Portage Lake Multi-Educational Services Inc

To operate and maintain a public recreation facility.

5
Forest County Historical Society

The collection, preservation and interpretation of all materials pertaining to the history of Forest County, PA.

6
Harbor Springs Snowmobile Club Inc

To promote winter recreation and maintain DNR designated recreational trails and facilities for use by the general public.

Unclassified
7
North Superior Ski and Running Club

The club provides trails for running and skiing on the Pincushion Mountain trail system supports the local high school ski team and running team including providing equipment and training and provides weekly ski lessons to elementary…

Recreation & Sports
8
Payette Lakes Ski Club Inc

The purpose of the organization is to provide alpine and nordic ski terrain, competition and instruction for the community and children of the area.

Recreation & Sports
9
Houghton Lake Area Historical Society Inc

To provide historical information to the public and to preserve for safekeeping historic artifacts and buildings. to promote performing arts and community events in the area.

10
Beaverland Must-Skis Inc

The promotion of the sport of water skiing through group participation in shows and tournaments. the development and maintenance of facilities for water skiing and to stimulate interest in water skiing among non-skiers in the community.

Human Services
11
Grass Lake Farmers Market
Food & Nutrition
12
Musical Theatre Festival Inc

To promote the arts, to foster and advance the development of and to stimulate community interest in the muscial, dramatic and peforming arts.

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mt Holiday Inc and the most unlike its peers is Woodland School Heartwood 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.

05the grantee network

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 17 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ST PAUL LUTHERAN SCHOOL CHICAGO — $223,000 · OtherST PAUL LUTHERAN SCHOOL CHICAGOGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL CONSER — $140,678 · OtherGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL CONSER+8 more — $21,492 · Other+8 moreLUTHERAN CAMP ASSOCIATION — $57,373 · ReligionLUTHERAN CAM…NORTHWEST MICHIGAN BALLET THEATRE — $27,500 · Arts & CultureMUSIC MOVES ME INC — $8,105 · Arts & CulturePleasant Valley Community Center — $20,400 · Human ServicesWOODLAND SCHOOL HEARTWOOD FOUNDATION INC — $15,805 · EducationPROJECT FEED THE KIDS INC — $5,000 · Food & NutritionMT HOLIDAY INC — $500 · Recreation & Sports
Other$385,170Religion$57,373Arts & Culture$35,605Human Services$20,400Education$15,805Food & Nutrition$5,000Recreation & Sports$500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetLUTHERAN CAMP ASSOCIATION — $57,373 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetNORTHWEST MICHIGAN BALLET THEATRE — $27,500 over 4y, 9.3% of budgetPleasant Valley Community Center — $20,400 over 8y, 5.6% of budgetWOODLAND SCHOOL HEARTWOOD FOUNDATION INC — $15,805 over 4y, 7.5% of budgetPROJECT FEED THE KIDS INC — $5,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetBENZIE AREA HISTORICAL SOCIETY — $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMT HOLIDAY INC — $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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 LUTHERAN CAMP ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds NORTHWEST MICHIGAN BALLET THEATRE
  • Who funds Pleasant Valley Community Center
  • Who funds WOODLAND SCHOOL HEARTWOOD FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds MUSIC MOVES ME INC
  • Who funds PROJECT FEED THE KIDS INC
  • Who funds BENZIE AREA HISTORICAL SOCIETY
  • Who funds MT HOLIDAY 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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA3.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Harold S Hansen & Naomi H Bodenstab Charitable 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your 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, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 17 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph