· Private foundation
Hrd-C 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k12 grants · $228k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $723k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SPRINGER SCHOOL & CENTER | $167,097 |
| THE SEVEN HILLS SCHOOL | $158,595 |
| NCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS INC | $98,497 |
| FORMAN SCHOOL | $82,241 |
| CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY | $76,705 |
| CINCINNATI PUBLIC RADIO INC (DBA WGUC WVXU WMUB) | $73,004 |
| RUMSEY HALL SCHOOL | $67,216 |
| LITCHFIELD HISTORICAL SOCIETY | $31,631 |
| Individual grant recipient | $30,840 |
| WOMEN HELPING WOMEN | $25,146 |
| NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY | $25,028 |
| LITCHFIELD LAND TRUST | $21,351 |
| CINCINNATI SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA | $20,279 |
| ST MICHAEL'S FOOD PANTRY | $15,816 |
| SPRINGER SCHOOL & CENTER | $15,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $65k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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 +49% since the first grant, against -45% for the ones you funded once.
26 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $229k 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
- TSTHE SEVEN HILLS SCHOOL9× · 2017–2025 · $523k · revenue +51%
SPRINGER SCHOOL AND CENTER6× · 2020–2025 · $460k · revenue +97%- FSFORMAN SCHOOL INC9× · 2017–2025 · $389k · revenue +19%
Funded once
- ICINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTSone grant, 2024 · $1.0M · revenue -48%
- MHMUSIC HALL REVITALIZATION COMPANY INCone grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue -100%
- UWUNITED WAYone grant, 2021 · $20k
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.
Protecting, enhancing and conserving open spaces encompassing meadows, woodlands, wetlands, and waterways in the town of wilton ct.
Museum has a mission to create opportunties for everyone to experience art that broadens understanding of the past, fosters community connections to the present, and creates diverse possbilities for the future.
Protect Connecticuts farmland for agricultural use by purchasing and accepting donations of agricultural conservation easements
To conserve the unique character of tennessee's natural and historic landscapes and sites for future generations.
To support healthy communities and a healthy earth, the institute for conservation leadership strengthens leaders, organizations, coalitions and networks.
The museum is an educational corporation formed to ignite a life-long passion for exploring, discovering, and valuing nature and science.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
The Land Conservancy of Ridgefield, Inc. ("the Land Conservancy"), founded in 1967, preserves and protects, for the general benefit of the public, Ridgefield, Connecticut's natural resources including land and water resources, the plant…
The primary mission of the Westchester Land Trust is to conserve, maintain and enhance the natural environment and resources of Westchester County and eastern Putnam County. The Trust acquires interests in land exhibiting important natural…
The mission of the lake champlain land trust is to save the scenic beauty, natural communities, and recreational amenities of lake champlain by permanently preserving significant islands, shoreline areas, and natural communities in the…
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Seven Hills School and the most unlike its peers is Ripley 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 55 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.
27 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. 27 of the 40 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 INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds THE SEVEN HILLS SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds SPRINGER SCHOOL AND CENTER ↗
- Who funds FORMAN SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds CINCINNATI SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds The Children's Theatre of Cincinnati ↗
- Who funds LITCHFIELD HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds CINCINNATI MUSEUM CENTER ↗
- Who funds RUMSEY HALL SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds NCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT SAGE INC ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR PARK AVENUE NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN HELPING WOMEN ↗
- Who funds RIPLEY INC ↗
- Who funds OLIVER WOLCOTT LIBRARY INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF COLLIER AND THE KEYS INC ↗
- Who funds LITCHFIELD LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds STEEP ROCK ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds MUSIC HALL REVITALIZATION COMPANY INC ↗
- Who funds COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY ↗
- Who funds LEELANAU CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE WHITE MEMORIAL CONSERVATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds Cincinnati Parks Foundation ↗
- Who funds SARARA INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Florida Wildlife Corridor Foundation 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 loosely connected circle, clustered around a few shared anchors.
Open a dossier: The Connecticut Community Foundation · Seherr-Thoss Charitable Trust · Louise Taft Semple Foundation · Carol Ann and Ralph V Haile Jr Foundation · The Greater Cincinnati Foundation · Denise Shea Malcolm Family Foundation · Bokom Foundation Inc · The James J and Joan a Gardner Family Foundation · Marge & Charles J Schott Foundation · Northwest Community Bank Foundation Inc · Johnson Charitable Gift Fund · The New York Community Trust
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 Hrd-C 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Steep Rock Association Inc — 19% of income from government
- Litchfield Historical Society — 3% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Hrd-C Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Hrd-C Foundation 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.