Skip to content

· Private foundation

Henry Dahlberg 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.

$9k
Granted FY2024still arriving
18
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$2k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$39kRecreation & Sports$17kYouth Development$16kEducation$12kHealth$8kArts & Culture$2kInternational$1kHuman Services$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$250
Median grant
5
States reached
$247k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR$2,000
PUSD EDUCATION FOUNDATION$1,000
THE LAUNCH PAD$1,000
ARIZONA WILDERNESS COALITION$1,000
YAVAPAI EXCEPTIONAL INDUSTRIES$1,000
CHINO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRIC$1,000
CENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUST$500
THE DEAF DREAM$500
GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY$250
STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION$250
GRANITE DELLS PRESERVATION FDN$100
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND$100
Individual grant recipient$100
NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSN$100
HIGH COUNTRY NEWS$100
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $3k → 14%BUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $2k → 15%THE DEAF DREAM: $2k → 8%VIRGINIA HAITI COLLABORATIVE: $1k → 8%PRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $3k → 14%BUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $1k → 15%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $2k → 14%BUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $1k → 15%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $2k → 14%BUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $1k → 15%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $2k → 14%BUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $1k → 15%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $2k → 14%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $2k → 14%BUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $1k → 15%GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY: $2k → 16%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $2k → 14%GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY: $2k → 16%HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTOR: $2k → 14%GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY: $2k → 16%GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY: $2k → 16%GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY: $2k → 16%CHINO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRIC: $1k → 14%GLEN CANYON NATURAL HISTORY ASSN: $1k → 16%HERITAGE MIDDLE SCHOOL: $1k → 14%CHINO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRIC: $1k → 14%CHINO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRIC: $1k → 14%PRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $3k → 14%CITY OF PRESCOTT RECREATION SVCS DE: $2k → 14%CITY OF PRESCOTT RECREATION SVCS DE: $2k → 14%CITY OF PRESCOTT RECREATION SVCS DE: $2k → 14%PRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $2k → 14%PUSD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $2k → 14%GRANITE MTN SCHOOL: $1k → 14%THE LAUNCH PAD: $1k → 14%YAVAPAI EXCEPTIONAL INDUSTRIES: $1k → 14%GRANITE MTN SCHOOL: $1k → 14%THE LAUNCH PAD: $1k → 14%THE LAUNCH PAD: $1k → 14%YAVAPAI EXCEPTIONAL INDUSTRIES: $1k → 14%PUSD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $1k → 14%YAVAPAI EXCEPTIONAL INDUSTRIES: $1k → 14%YAVAPAI EXCEPTIONAL INDUSTRIES: $1k → 14%THE LAUNCH PAD: $1k → 14%SHARLOT HALL MUSEUM: $1k → 14%GRANITE MTN SCHOOL: $1k → 14%YAVAPAI EXCEPTIONAL INDUSTRIES: $1k → 14%THE LAUNCH PAD: $1k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
NY
UT
CO
VA
AZ
NM
DC
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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 34% of Henry Dahlberg Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 95% of the giving stays in AZ; by stated purpose, 74%.

Henry Dahlberg Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 3.4% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$92k · 25 repeat orgs$5k to everyone else

25 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
9

Total granted

$92k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+119%

Still filing today

52%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • HC
    HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTORY
    8× · 2017–2024 · $17k · revenue +31%
  • TL
    The Launch Pad Teen Center
    7× · 2018–2024 · $7k · revenue +134%
  • CA
    CENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUST
    8× · 2017–2024 · $4k · revenue +255%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • HM
    HERITAGE MIDDLE SCHOOL
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • TS
    TERROIR SEEDS LLC
    one grant, 2017 · $500
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
Grand Canyon Conservancy

As the official philanthropic and collaborative partner of the grand canyon national park, grand canyon conservancy's mission is to inspire generations of park champions to cherish and support the natural and cultural wonder of the grand…

Environment
2
Greater Yellowstone Coalition

Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.

Environment
3
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
4
Arizona Forward Association

Arizona Forward brings business and civic leaders together to promote cooperative efforts to improve the environmental sustainability and economic vitality of our state and local regions.

Community Improvement
5
Climate Conservation Dba Center for Large Landscape Conservation

We bring science, policy, and proven solutions directly to communities working to restore the integrity and natural connectivity of the landscapes in which they live. (see schedule o)

Environment
6
Arizona Wildlife Federation

Arizona Wildlife Federation's purpose is to promote and encourage the conservation, propagation, development and management of fish, game and other wildlife; to promote and encourage the wise use, conservation and restoration of waters,…

Animals
7
Laguna Canyon Foundation

Laguna canyon foundation is dedicated to the conservation and ongoing protection of the south coast wilderness. we envision a thriving coastal ecosystem that serves as a source of inspiration, connection, and refuge for all.

Environment
8
Utah Public Lands Alliance
Education
9
Prescott Creeks Preservation Association

Prescott Creeks is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization with a mission to achieve healthy watersheds and clean waters in central Arizona for the benefit of people and wildlife through protection, restoration, education, and advocacy.

—
10
Arizona Center for Nature Conservation

The arizona center for nature conservation advances the stewardship and conservation of animals and their habitats while providing experiences that inspire people and motivate them to care for the natural world.

Animals
11
Arizona Site Steward Program Foundation
Education
12
The Archaeological Conservancy

To acquire and preserve america's most important archaeological sites. the conservancy identifies important endangered sites, acquires the property by purchase, gift, or bargain sale from donors, secures the property, stabilizes the…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Grand Canyon Trust Inc; the most unlike its peers is Natural Resources Defense Council 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

15 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. 15 of the 34 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY: $11,000 · OtherGLEN CANYON CONSERVANCYYavapai Exceptional Industries: $8,000 · OtherYavapai Exceptional IndustriesPRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $8,000 · OtherPRESCOTT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTCITY OF PRESCOTT RECREATION SVCS DE: $7,404 · OtherCITY OF PRESCOTT RECREATION SVCS DEBUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $6,500 · OtherBUTTERFIELD ELEMENTARY SCHOOLGRANITE MTN SCHOOL: $3,250 · OtherGRANITE MTN SCHOOLCHINO VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRIC: $3,000 · OtherPUSD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $2,525 · OtherDEAF DREAM: $2,160 · Other+13 more: $8,169 · Other+13 moreHIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTORY: $17,000 · EnvironmentHIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL H…CENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUST: $4,000 · EnvironmentCENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUSTWILD ARIZONA: $2,550 · EnvironmentWILD ARIZONA+5 more: $2,050 · Environment+5 moreThe Launch Pad Teen Center: $7,050 · Youth DevelopmentARIZONA 4-H YOUTH FOUNDATION: $500 · Youth DevelopmentSHARLOT HALL HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AZ: $2,000 · Arts & CultureGranite Dells Preservation Foundation: $1,500 · Community Improvement
Other$60,008Environment$25,600Youth Development$7,550Arts & Culture$2,000Community Improvement$1,500

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 budgetHIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTORY: $17,000 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetGLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY: $11,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetYavapai Exceptional Industries: $8,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetThe Launch Pad Teen Center: $7,050 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetCENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUST: $4,000 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetWILD ARIZONA: $2,550 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetSHARLOT HALL HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AZ: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGranite Dells Preservation Foundation: $1,500 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetHIGH COUNTRY NEWS: $700 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC: $500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $150 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% 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 HIGHLANDS CENTER FOR NATURAL HISTORY ↗
  • Who funds GLEN CANYON CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds Yavapai Exceptional Industries ↗
  • Who funds The Launch Pad Teen Center ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL ARIZONA LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds WILD ARIZONA ↗
  • Who funds SHARLOT HALL HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AZ ↗
  • Who funds Granite Dells Preservation Foundation ↗
  • Who funds HIGH COUNTRY NEWS ↗
  • Who funds THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds ARIZONA 4-H YOUTH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds THE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC ↗

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.

Arizona Community FoundationAZ18.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Margaret T Morris Foundation · 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 Henry Dahlberg Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Henry Dahlberg Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%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 · 0–90%
    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 34 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Henry Dahlberg’s filings →

    More from the funding graph