Skip to content
Margaret Craig Chrisman Family Foun at a glance

· Private foundation

Margaret Craig Chrisman Family Foun

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$96k
Granted FY2020
14
Grants FY2020
7
States reached
$89k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

Philanthropy$89kHousing & Shelter$8kHealth$5kAnimals$3kFood & Nutrition$2kEnvironment$2kEducation$1kInternational$800Other$0
02FY2020 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k13 grants · $7k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $89k
$550
Median grant
7
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN AZ$89,263
TUCSON COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$1,450
COMPASSION AND CHOICES$1,000
FULLER CENTER FOR HOUSING$1,000
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION$675
CORNELL LAB OF ORNITHOLOGY$570
ANIMAL LEAGUE DEFENSE FUND$550
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$500
Individual grant recipient$500
RAISING HOPE$300
HUMANE SOCIETY OF AZ$275
OCEAN CONSERVANCY$100
AUDUBON SOCIETY$75
DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE$50
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 (FY20–20, $300) 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%RAISING HOPE: $300 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
MA
OR
CA
CO
VA
AZ
NM
DC
GA
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.

15%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$16k · 9 repeat orgs$96k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +87% since the first grant, against +65% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
7

Total granted

$16k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+87%
+65%

Still filing today

33%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 4% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $92k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20
AnimalsEnvironmentHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesCivil RightsArts & CultureOther
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

  • CC
    COMPASSION & CHOICES
    3× · 2017–2020 · $3k · revenue +169%
  • NW
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION
    2× · 2018–2020 · $1k · revenue +87%
  • DO
    Defenders of Wildlife
    2× · 2019–2020 · $350 · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • AC
    AMERICAN COUNCIL OF TRUSTEES AND ALUMNIgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +89%
  • II
    ICCF INTERNATIONAL CONS FDN
    one grant, 2019 · $500
  • WA
    WESTERN ART AND INNOVATION
    one grant, 2019 · $500
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
4
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
5
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
6
International Conservation Caucus Network

To advance conservation governance through political will and to provide "on the ground" solutions to ensure sustained economic benefits while managing the earth's natural resource wealth for future generations.

Unclassified
7
Center for Biological Diversity Inc

The center for biological diversity inc, works to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. we do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and…

Animals
8
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
9
Florida Conservation Group Inc

Mission is to seek protection of land and water resources through restoration and conservation; and conducting education and outreach on the ecological and economic importance of natural lands. we protect land from development and protect…

Environment
10
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
11
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
12
Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum

We inspire people to live in harmony with the natural world by fostering love, appreciation, and understanding of the sonoran desert.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Nature Conservancy; the most unlike its peers is Americus-Sumter Fuller Center for Housing. 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

12 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. 12 of the 24 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
11/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN AZ: $89,263 · OtherCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF SOUTHERN AZHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL: $5,026 · Other+12 more: $11,420 · Other+12 moreCOMPASSION & CHOICES: $2,500 · Civil RightsNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $1,100 · AnimalsDefenders of Wildlife: $350 · AnimalsTucson Wildlife Center Inc: $250 · AnimalsTHE FULLER CENTER FOR HOUSING INC: $1,000 · Housing & ShelterAMERICAN COUNCIL OF TRUSTEES AND ALUMNI: $1,000 · Arts & CultureTOHONO CHUL PARK INC: $500 · EnvironmentOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $100 · EnvironmentRAISINGHOPE INC: $300 · Human ServicesTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $300 · International
Other$105,709Civil Rights$2,500Animals$1,700Housing & Shelter$1,000Arts & Culture$1,000Environment$600Human Services$300International$300

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMPASSION & CHOICES: $2,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $1,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FULLER CENTER FOR HOUSING INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN COUNCIL OF TRUSTEES AND ALUMNI: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRAISINGHOPE INC: $300 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTucson Wildlife Center Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $100 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Margaret Craig Chrisman Family Foun funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Margaret Craig Chrisman Family Foun. 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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.

    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 24 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Margaret Craig Chrisman Family Foun’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