Skip to content
Lacygoldenstein Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Lacygoldenstein Fund

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.

$16k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$198kCommunity Improvement$57kAnimals$14kReligion$6kHuman Services$5kEducation$5kHousing & Shelter$3kCivil Rights$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$17k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SEDONA INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL$10,250
THE GADEN SHARTSE CULTURAL FOUNDATION$2,000
SEDONA SISTER CITIES ASSOCIATION$1,000
NORTHERN ARIZONA HEALTHCARE OFFICE OF PHILANTHROPY$1,000
SEDONA SYMPHONY$500
FINE ART MUSEUM OF SEDONA$500
THE ARTISTS FORUM$500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–21, $29k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CORNUCOPIA COMMUNITY ADVOCATES: $18k → 14%CORNUCOPIA COMMUNITY ADVOCATES: $5k → 14%CORNUCOPIA COMMUNITY ADVOCATES: $3k → 14%CORNUCOPIA COMMUNITY ADVOCATES: $1k → 14%SEDONA AREA HOMELESS ALLIANCE: $2k → 14%SEDONA AREA HOMELESS ALLIANCE: $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.
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 14% of Lacygoldenstein Fund’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Lacygoldenstein Fundlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$275k · 22 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
7

Total granted

$275k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+261%

Still filing today

73%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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 & CultureHuman ServicesAnimalsEnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationOther
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

  • SI
    Sedona International Film Festival & Workshop
    9× · 2017–2025 · $145k · revenue +156%
  • VV
    VERDE VALLEY SANCTUARY
    6× · 2017–2024 · $29k · revenue +1%
  • SS
    SEDONA SYMPHONY
    6× · 2017–2025 · $10k · revenue +217%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
  • HW
    Healthy World Sedona
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +261% · 31% of their budget
  • SJ
    ST JOHN VIANNEY CATHOLIC PARISH
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
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
Sedona Community Food Bank

The mission of the organization is to operate as an active community food bank for the distribution of food and food programs thourghout the sedona area. the food bank is supported through contributions from individuals and other…

Food & Nutrition
2
Piano On the Rocks International Festival

Musical performance and education.

Arts & Culture
3
Southern Arizona Reptile Rescue and Education Inc

To advocate on behalf of reptiles through Rescue, Relocation, Rehabilitation and Education

Animals
4
Southeastern Arizona Bird Observatory Inc

The Southeastern Arizona Bird Observatory SABO is a non-profit organization dedicated to the conservation of the birds of southeastern Arizona, their habitats and the diversity of species that share those habitats through research,…

Environment
5
Adult Community Center of Sedona Sedona Community Center

The Sedona Community Center's mission is to enhance quality of life for people of the greater Sedona community through our award winning food programs, outstanding exercise and educational activities, and compassionate supportive services.

—
6
Unify Sedona a Rainbow Alliance

Unify sedona promotes diversity

Human Services
7
Save Our Mountains Foundation

Support Education Conservation and Research on Various Phoenix Preserves

—
8
Sedav Vaaki Museum Foundation

To support and educate.

—
9
Sierra Vista Symphony Association

Providing Cultural Arts to the Community

Human Services
10
Keep Sedona Beautiful Inc

Keep Sedona Beautiful is committed to protect and sustain the scenic beauty and natural environment of Sedona and the Verde Valley

—
11
Arizona Site Steward Program Foundation
Education
12
Sedona Chamber Ballet Company

To present world-class dance artistry onstage. We aim to make all forms of dance relevant, accessible, and inviting to the widest possible audience while maintaining financial stability. To offer artistic immersion in the most significant…

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sedona Arts Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Free Soul. 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

24 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. 24 of the 35 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/24
Grantees still filing
17/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Sedona International Film Festival & Workshop: $144,750 · Arts & CultureSedona International Film Festival & WorkshopSEDONA ARTS CENTER INC: $12,000 · Arts & CultureSEDONA ARTS CENTER INCSEDONA SYMPHONY: $9,500 · Arts & CultureThe Gaden Sharste Cultural Foundation: $9,000 · Arts & Culture+4 more: $12,100 · Arts & Culture+4 moreCORNUCOPIA COMMUNITY ADVOCATES: $26,750 · Human ServicesCORNUCOPIA C…ROTARY CLUB OF SEDONA CHARITABLE FUND: $3,000 · Human ServicesROTARY CLUB …SEDONA AREA HOMELESS ALLIANCE: $2,500 · Human ServicesSEDONA AREA …SEDONA CHAMBER MUSIC SOCIETY INC: $9,500 · OtherSEDONA CHAMB…PLAN B FOUNDATION: $6,000 · OtherPLAN B FOUND…CHAPEL OF THE HOLY CROSS: $3,000 · OtherCHAPEL OF TH…SEDONA INTERNATIONAL CITY OF PEACE: $2,000 · OtherSEDONA INTER…Individual grant recipient: $2,000 · OtherIndividual g…FREE SOUL: $1,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $1,250 · Other+11 more: $8,700 · Other+11 moreVERDE VALLEY SANCTUARY: $29,000 · Community ImprovementVERDE VALLE…LITTLE ORPHAN ANIMALS INC: $4,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF SEDONA INC: $3,500 · AnimalsSEDONA PUBLIC LIBRARY INC: $4,500 · EducationARIZONA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 · PhilanthropySISTERHOOD CONNECTION FOUNDATION INC: $500 · Philanthropy
Arts & Culture$187,350Human Services$32,250Other$33,950Community Improvement$29,000Animals$7,500Education$4,500Philanthropy$1,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSedona International Film Festival & Workshop: $144,750 over 9y, 2.2% of budgetVERDE VALLEY SANCTUARY: $29,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetCORNUCOPIA COMMUNITY ADVOCATES: $26,750 over 4y, 8.1% of budgetSEDONA ARTS CENTER INC: $12,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetSEDONA SYMPHONY: $9,500 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetSEDONA CHAMBER MUSIC SOCIETY INC: $9,500 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetThe Gaden Sharste Cultural Foundation: $9,000 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetPLAN B FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetSedona Historical Society Inc: $4,850 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetSEDONA PUBLIC LIBRARY INC: $4,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF SEDONA INC: $3,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF SEDONA CHARITABLE FUND: $3,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetRED ROCKS MUSIC FESTIVAL: $2,750 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetSEDONA AREA HOMELESS ALLIANCE: $2,500 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetSEDONA ARTS FESTIVAL: $2,500 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetNORTHERN AZ RESTORATIVE JUSTICE: $2,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetARIZONA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHealthy World Sedona: $1,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetVETERANS FIRST LIMITED: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSEDONA RECYCLES INC: $200 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.

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 Fou…The Kling Family Foun…The Zachary Barker Ch…John W and Clara C Hi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Arizona Community FoundationAZ26.6× affinity12 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · The Kling Family Foundation · The Zachary Barker Chittick Foundation · John W and Clara C Higgins Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Lacygoldenstein Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lacygoldenstein Fund. 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Lacygoldenstein Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Lacygoldenstein 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.

    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 35 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Lacygoldenstein’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home