Skip to content
Lucy E Holcombe Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Lucy E Holcombe Charitable 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.

$291k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$180k
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.

Environment$566kAnimals$465kReligion$268kArts & Culture$260kEducation$210kHuman Services$175kFood & Nutrition$110kCommunity Improvement$110kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $263k
$83,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Granby Land Trust$180,000
Individual grant recipient$83,000
Sugar Hill Imprvmnt Assoc$15,000
All Saints Food Bank$12,500
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 (FY20–24, $125k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 80% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Waypoint: $25k → 7%Women's Resource Center: $50k → 7%Federal Hill House Assoc: $50k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

31%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$763k · 7 repeat orgs$1.7M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +117% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
37

Total granted

$763k
$1.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+117%
+12%

Still filing today

57%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 29% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $208k 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
AnimalsEnvironmentEducationHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • OC
    ORLEANS CONSERVATION TRUST
    2× · 2017–2019 · $155k · revenue +184%
  • WC
    WILD CAREINC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $110k · revenue +117%
  • HP
    HARTFORD PROMISE INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $100k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • SP
    SCRUFFY PAWS ANIMAL RESCUE
    one grant, 2021 · $150k · revenue -5% · 40% of their budget
  • FO
    Friends of the Cape Cod National Seashore Inc
    one grant, 2024 · $100k · revenue 0% · 44% of their budget
  • WH
    WARREN HERITAGE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $85k · revenue -65% · 78% of their budget
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
Harpswell Heritage Land Trust

Land Conservation, Trails and Public Access, Education

Environment
2
Massachusetts Outdoor Heritage Foundation Inc Attn Susan Sacco
—
3
Walpole Historical Society

The preservation and interpretation of the history of the Town of Walpole

—
4
Cohasset Conservation Trust Inc
—
5
Piscataquog Land Conservancy

The Piscataquog Land Conservancy is a nonprofit land conservation organization founded in 1970. Its purpose is to conserve the natural and scenic environment of the Piscataquog, Souhegan and Nashua River watershed communities of southern…

—
6
Westwood Land Trust Inc

To promote the protection and stewardship of open space and natural resources in the Town of Westwood.

Environment
7
Nashoba Conservation Trust

Acquire, preserve and maintain natural resources and wildlife habitat areas (land conservation).

Environment
8
Nahant Preservation Trust Inc

The Nahant Preservation Trust ("NPT") is an all-volunteer, not-for-profit charitable corporation whose mission is to preserve our open spaces, historically significant properties, and our conservation lands for public and community benefit.

Community Improvement
9
Hilltown Land Trust Inc

Hilltown land trust conserves and stewards land through strong relationships to ensure clean water, wildlife habitat, climate resilience, recreational opportunities, and healthy farmland for the benefit of all.

Environment
10
Cuttyhunk Historical Society Inc
Arts & Culture
11
Upper Saco Valley Land Trust

The Organization works with local landowners to permanently protect natural land and waters that define its community and enrich the quality of life by purchasing, managing, negotiating and developing conservations easements in the Upper…

Food & Nutrition
12
Harwich Conservation Trust

Preservation and conservation of open space in harwich, massachusetts

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Amos House; the most unlike its peers is Arlington Historical Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

28 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. 28 of the 47 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.

7
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/28
Grantees still filing
17/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $183,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFriends of the Cape Cod National Seashore Inc: $100,000 · OtherFriends of the Cape Cod National Seashore IncAll Saints Episcopal Church: $75,000 · OtherAll Saints Episcopal ChurchAHEAD: $69,500 · OtherAHEADFarm Fresh RI Hope's Harvest: $65,065 · OtherFarm Fresh RI Hope's HarvestFirst Church of Christ: $50,000 · OtherFranconia Are Heritage Council: $50,000 · OtherSUGAR HILL HISTORICAL MUSEUM: $50,000 · OtherGrafton Cnty Sen Citizens Council: $50,000 · OtherAudubon Society of RI: $45,000 · OtherAMOS HOUSE: $38,000 · OtherCOPPER CANNON CORPORATION: $60,000 · OtherCOPPER CANNON CORPORATION+16 more: $261,500 · Other+16 moreGranby Land Trust Inc: $180,000 · EnvironmentGranby Land Trust In…ORLEANS CONSERVATION TRUST: $155,000 · EnvironmentORLEANS CONSERVATION…WALTHAM LAND TR INC: $55,600 · EnvironmentWALTHAM LAND TR INCAMMONOOSUC CONSERVATION TRUST: $50,000 · EnvironmentAMMONOOSUC CONSERVAT…SCRUFFY PAWS ANIMAL RESCUE: $150,000 · AnimalsSCRUFFY PAWS ANIMAL…WILD CAREINC: $110,400 · AnimalsWILD CAREINCTHE KILHAM BEAR CENTER INC: $60,000 · AnimalsTHE KILHAM BEAR CEN…Congress of the Birds: $50,000 · AnimalsCongress of the Bir…SECOND CHANCE ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $50,000 · AnimalsSECOND CHANCE ANIMA…HARTFORD PROMISE INC: $100,000 · EducationTRUSTEES OF PHILLIPS ACADEMY: $40,000 · EducationSHIPLEY SCHOOL: $25,000 · EducationHAVERHILL HERITAGE INC: $70,000 · Community ImprovementHOPE & MAIN: $50,000 · Community ImprovementWILLING WORKERS SOCIETY: $20,000 · Community ImprovementWOMENS RESOURCE CENTER OF NEWPORT AND BRISTOL COUNTIES: $50,000 · Human ServicesFEDERAL HILL HOUSE ASSOCIATION INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesWAYPOINT: $25,000 · Human ServicesWARREN HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $85,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,097,065Environment$440,600Animals$420,400Education$165,000Community Improvement$140,000Human Services$125,000Arts & Culture$85,000

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 budgetGranby Land Trust Inc: $180,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetORLEANS CONSERVATION TRUST: $155,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetSCRUFFY PAWS ANIMAL RESCUE: $150,000 over 1y, 40% of budgetWILD CAREINC: $110,400 over 2y, 13% of budgetHARTFORD PROMISE INC: $100,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetFriends of the Cape Cod National Seashore Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetWARREN HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $85,000 over 1y, 78% of budgetHAVERHILL HERITAGE INC: $70,000 over 2y, 18% of budgetCOPPER CANNON CORPORATION: $60,000 over 1y, 9.1% of budgetTHE KILHAM BEAR CENTER INC: $60,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetHOPE & MAIN: $50,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetWOMENS RESOURCE CENTER OF NEWPORT AND BRISTOL COUNTIES: $50,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetFEDERAL HILL HOUSE ASSOCIATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCongress of the Birds: $50,000 over 1y, 10.0% of budgetSUGAR HILL HISTORICAL MUSEUM: $50,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetSECOND CHANCE ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetTRUSTEES OF PHILLIPS ACADEMY: $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMOS HOUSE: $38,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNORTH COUNTRY HOME HEALTH & HOSPICE AGENCY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSECRET SOCK SOCIETY: $25,000 over 1y, 83% of budgetWAYPOINT: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSHIPLEY SCHOOL: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLUCY'S HEARTH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

New Hampshire Charita…The Rhode Island Comm…Amica Companies Found…Edith Crocker Charita…United Way of Rhode I…Ibm International Fou…Eversource Energy Fou…Citizens Charitable F…Paypal Charitable Giv…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …
New Hampshire Charitable FoundationNH22× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · The Rhode Island Community Foundation · Amica Companies Foundation · Edith Crocker Charitable Trust · United Way of Rhode Island Inc · Ibm International Foundation · Eversource Energy Foundation Inc · Citizens Charitable Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Lucy E Holcombe Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lucy E Holcombe Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 51%
  • Arlington Historical Society: 51% of income from government
  • Orleans Conservation Trust: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 Lucy E Holcombe Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Lucy E Holcombe Charitable 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.

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 47 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 Lucy E Holcombe’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