· Private foundation
Living Closer 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.
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 $10k2 grants · $8k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $132k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $500k
- $250k+1 grant · $458k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION | $458,100 |
| GLOBAL CITIZEN | $150,000 |
| BETH ISRAEL LAHEY HEALTH | $100,000 |
| SOCIAL GOOD FUND | $100,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATION | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $38,159 |
| BBC GLOBAL NEWS LIMITED | $20,000 |
| USA FOR UNHCR | $12,360 |
| PARTNERSHIP FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT | $11,000 |
| FOSSIL FUEL NON-PROLIFERATION TREAT INITIATIVE | $10,000 |
| CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| PERSHING LLC | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL | $10,000 |
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 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +17% since the first grant, against -59% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $211k 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
- BIBETH ISRAEL LAHEY HEALTH INC2× · 2023–2024 · $200k · revenue +58%
- TETHE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATIONINC3× · 2022–2024 · $150k · revenue +5%
- APAMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION3× · 2022–2024 · $9k · revenue +17%
Funded once
- UPUNIVERSITY PHYSICIANS INCORPORATEDone grant, 2023 · $125k
- CGCLIMATE GENERATIONone grant, 2023 · $105k · revenue -35%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $40k
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.
Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Heal utah's mission is to protect utah's environment and its people by promoting clean air, clean energy, and comprehensive solutions to radioactive and toxic waste.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…
E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Chief executives for corporate purpose (cecp) is the only business counsel and network dedicated to driving measurable returns on purpose. we promote responsible purpose-driven business as it increases customer loyalty, builds employee…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cambridge Health Alliance Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Fire on the Mountain Incorporated. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 29 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 UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds BETH ISRAEL LAHEY HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL POVERTY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds THE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATIONINC ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE GENERATION ↗
- Who funds United States Association for UNHCR ↗
- Who funds CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Fire on the Mountain Incorporated ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NOURISH COLORADO ↗
- Who funds EARTH DAY NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds New Legacy Charter School ↗
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: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Living Closer 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 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.