· Private foundation
Holman Foundation Inc
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.
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 $10k4 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k34 grants · $690k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $195k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COMMITTEE TO UNLEASH PROSPERITY | $145,000 |
| CENTER FOR EQUAL OPPORTUNITY | $50,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATION | $45,000 |
| COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE | $35,000 |
| AMERICAN CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT | $35,000 |
| NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK LEGAL DEFENSE FOUNDATION INC | $35,000 |
| THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION | $35,000 |
| INTERCOLLEGIATE STUDIES INSTITUTE INC | $30,000 |
| ETHICS & PUBLIC POLICY CENTER INC | $30,000 |
| INDEPENDENT WOMEN'S FORUM | $30,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $30,000 |
| AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL | $30,000 |
| PACIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| REASON FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| GOODMAN INSTITUTE | $20,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 63% of your 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.
46 repeat relationships — 35 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
- UPUNLEASH PROSPERITY INC8× · 2017–2024 · $440k · revenue +468%
- CFCENTER FOR EQUAL OPPORTUNITY8× · 2017–2024 · $404k · revenue +11%
THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $370k · revenue +63%
Funded once
- BRBENJAMIN RUSH SOCIETYone grant, 2017 · $20k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $20k
- ABAMERICAN BUSINESS DEFENSE COUNCILone grant, 2022 · $15k
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 educate the public on constitutional issues and public policy matters. We are dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, peace through strength, limited government, free enterprise, and the values embodied in the Declaration of…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Iri advances freedom and democracy worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, democratic governance and the rule of law.
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
Promote competition that protects consumers, businesses, and society.
To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…
The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
The institute works as a public education organization that focuses on a wide spectrum of rapidly evolving foreign policy and international issues.
To educate the public regarding its proposal to implement a Nationwide Popular Vote Election of the President of the United States by providing objectively-determined information, data, analyses, and studies aimed at improving
American press institute acts as a scout on the frontier of technology and audience behavior to identify where change is occurring and helps news organizations learn how to implement and scale that change successfully so they have a…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression 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 34 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
45 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. 45 of the 54 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
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 UNLEASH PROSPERITY INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ↗
- Who funds THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Foundation for Economic Education Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL RIGHT TO WORK LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COMPETITIVE ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CATO INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN LEGISLATIVE EXCHANGE COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds ETHICS AND PUBLIC POLICY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds INTERCOLLEGIATE STUDIES INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Independent Women's Forum ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN TRANSPARENCY ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR FREE SPEECH ↗
- Who funds Pacific Research Institute For Public Policy ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds MANHATTAN INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds ASHLAND UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE EQUAL VOTING RIGHTS INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Bill of Rights Institute ↗
- Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds Leadership Institute ↗
- Who funds Institute for Humane Studies ↗
- Who funds BENJAMIN RUSH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds NETWORK OF ENLIGHTENED WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC ↗
- Who funds New Civil Liberties Alliance ↗
- Who funds THE FUND FOR AMERICAN STUDIES ↗
- Who funds REAL CLEAR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CERTELL INC ↗
- Who funds America's Future Foundation ↗
- Who funds Teneo Inc ↗
- Who funds JOB CREATORS NETWORK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN COMMITMENT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FREEDOMWORKS 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: Donors Trust Inc · Sarah Scaife Foundation Incorporated · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation Inc · The 85 Fund · Diana Davis Spencer Foundation Inc · John William Pope Foundation · Triad Foundation Inc · Adolph Coors Foundation · Garvey Kansas Foundation · Ken W Davis Foundation · Woodford 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 Holman Foundation Inc 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Holman Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Holman Foundation Inc 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.