· Private foundation
La Salle Adams Fund
Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
100% of La Salle Adams Fund’s FY2021 grant dollars went to Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2021 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2018, the last year La Salle Adams Fund named its own grantees at scale: 10 organizations, $1M. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2021.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2018
- $10k–50k4 grants · $110k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $975k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY | $250,000 |
| EARTHJUSTICE | $225,000 |
| THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY | $225,000 |
| WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS | $200,000 |
| NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION | $150,000 |
| RESOURCES LEGACY FUND | $125,000 |
| PUBLIC LAND SOLUTIONS | $50,000 |
| MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION | $40,000 |
| CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS | $30,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS - LAF DAF | $20,000 |
| HEADWATER ECONOMICS | $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 (FY18–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 97% 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.
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.
10 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down. Read against FY2018, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2019, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- GTGRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY2× · 2018–2019 · $1.0M · revenue +93%
EARTHJUSTICE2× · 2018–2019 · $550k · revenue +114%- WOWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS2× · 2018–2019 · $380k · revenue +193%
Funded once
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 establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.
Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.
The western pennsylvania conservancy protects and restores exceptional places to provide our region with clean waters and healthy forests, wildlife and natural areas for the benefit of present and future generations. the conservancy…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.
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…
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.
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
Amazon conservation unites science, people, and innovation to protect the amazon - the greatest wild forest on earth. as guardians of the most iconic forest on the planet, we bring together the power of the latest science and technology…
The mission of the association is to inspire "deeper connection, better understanding, and enduring support for our public lands."
Preserve in perpetuity the natural habitats, rural landscapes, and open spaces of the great peninsula of washington's puget sound.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Wilderness Society and the most unlike its peers is Earthjustice. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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.
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 GS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC ↗
- Who funds GRAND TRAVERSE REGIONAL LAND CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds RESOURCES LEGACY FUND ↗
- Who funds MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC LAND SOLUTIONS ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS ↗
- Who funds HEADWATERS ECONOMICS INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: The William & Flora Hewlett 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 La Salle Adams Fund 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 La Salle Adams Fund?
Find your warmest path to La Salle Adams Fund 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.