· Private foundation
Raymond & Margaret Vicker Trust
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 48% of RAYMOND & MARGARET VICKER TRUST’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k6 grants · $29k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ARIZONA LAND & WATER TRUST | $50,000 |
| CASEYS CHILDREN | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $30,000 |
| CASA ADOBES ROTARY FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| CASA DE LOS NINOS INC | $5,000 |
| YOUTH ON THEIR OWN | $5,000 |
| PATRONATO SAN XAVIER | $5,000 |
| TUCSON FESTIVAL OF BOOKS | $5,000 |
| RINCON ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| THE CENTURIONS OF SOUTHERN ARIZONA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 12% of Raymond & Margaret Vicker Trust’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. Read by recipient address, 88% of the giving stays in AZ; read by stated purpose it is 84% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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.
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 +44% since the first grant, against +0% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 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, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
- CFCASEY FAMILY PROGRAMS2× · 2020–2021 · $75k · revenue +585%
- RCROTARY CLUB OF TUCSON FOUNDATION3× · 2020–2022 · $45k · revenue +17%
- RRRincon Rotary Club Foundation5× · 2020–2024 · $25k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- CFCommunity Food Bank Incone grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue -18%
- MCMEXICO CHILDRENS FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2023 · $15k
- EAESPERANCA ARIZONA LLCone grant, 2022 · $15k
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.
CSCAZ uplifts and strengthens people impacted by cancer by providing support, fostering compassionate communities, and breaking down barriers to care.
To provide children and youth in arizona a safe environment, free from abuse and neglect, by creating strong and successful families.
We build relationships that enhance the development of skills, foster a sense of worth and enhance a belief in each child's individual potential.
The Arts Foundation mission is to advance artistic expression, civic participation, and equitable economic growth of our diverse community by supporting, promoting, and advocating for arts and culture in our region.
We drive economic and political empowerment.
The mission of arizona's children association is to protect children, empower youth, and strengthen families.
Impact of southern arizona is a private non-profit volunteer based organization which empowers southern arizonans with the resources required to pursue a stabilized and enhanced quality of life.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Casa De Los Ninos and the most unlike its peers is Casey Family Programs. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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. 15 of the 21 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 ARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds CASEY FAMILY PROGRAMS ↗
- Who funds ROTARY CLUB OF TUCSON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds STEPS OF LOVE ↗
- Who funds Community Food Bank Inc ↗
- Who funds YOUTH ON THEIR OWN ↗
- Who funds Rincon Rotary Club Foundation ↗
- Who funds CASA DE LOS NINOS ↗
- Who funds THE CENTURIONS ↗
- Who funds PATRONATO SAN XAVIER ↗
- Who funds Life Circle ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TUCSON FESTIVAL OF BOOKS ↗
- Who funds Integrative Touch ↗
- Who funds ARIZONA WOMENS CHORUS ↗
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: Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · William and Mary Ross Foundation · The Hs Lopez Family Foundation · Arizona Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable 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 Raymond & Margaret Vicker Trust 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.