Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Patricia S and William J Hagenah 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.

$600k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Education$3.2MEnvironment$1.7MHealth$1.0MScience & Tech$250kFood & Nutrition$200k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$200,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER$200,000
HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES$200,000
STANFORD UNIVERSITY$200,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 95% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY: $200k → 14%YERKES FUTURE FOUNDATION INC: $250k → 10%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $250k → 12%CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY - CHICAGO BOTANIC GA: $200k → 14%SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY: $200k → 14%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $250k → 12%CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $200k → 14%SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY: $200k → 14%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $200k → 12%CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $200k → 14%SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY: $200k → 14%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $200k → 12%CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY - CHICAGO BOTANIC GA: $100k → 14%SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY: $200k → 14%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $175k → 12%RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: $200k → 14%SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY: $200k → 14%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $150k → 12%RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: $200k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $50k → 14%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $25k → 12%RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: $200k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $50k → 14%HANOVER COLLEGE TRUSTEES: $25k → 12%RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: $200k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $50k → 14%RUSH UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: $200k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 17% of Patricia S and William J Hagenah Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Patricia S and William J Hagenah Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$4.2M · 5 repeat orgs$250k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +97% since the first grant, against -19% for the ones you funded once.

5 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$4.2M
$250k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+97%
-19%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EducationEnvironmentHealthOther

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

  • HC
    Hanover College
    8× · 2017–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +115%
  • SC
    SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY
    6× · 2017–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +97%
  • RU
    Rush University Medical Center
    5× · 2021–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +14%

Funded once

  • YF
    YERKES FUTURE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $250k · revenue -19%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
05the grantee network

7 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 8 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $1,800,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSIT…Hanover College — $1,275,000 · EducationHanover CollegeYERKES FUTURE FOUNDATION INC — $250,000 · EducationYERKES FUTURE FOUNDATION INCUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $150,000 · EducationSANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY — $1,200,000 · OtherSANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONS…CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY - CHICAGO BOTANIC GA — $300,000 · OtherCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCI…Rush University Medical Center — $1,000,000 · HealthRush University M…CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY — $400,000 · Environment
Education$3,475,000Other$1,500,000Health$1,000,000Environment$400,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $1,800,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetHanover College — $1,275,000 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetSANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY — $1,200,000 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetRush University Medical Center — $1,000,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY — $400,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetYERKES FUTURE FOUNDATION INC — $250,000 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $150,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budget
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 THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds Hanover College
  • Who funds SANTA CATALINA ISLAND CONSERVANCY
  • Who funds Rush University Medical Center
  • Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY
  • Who funds YERKES FUTURE FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

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.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA10.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Patricia S and William J Hagenah 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Patricia S and William J Hagenah Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Patricia S and William J Hagenah 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 8 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph