· Private foundation
Risbrudt-Eian Charitable Trust
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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k24 grants · $64k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $62k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CRESENT COVE | $25,000 |
| LUCAS KARL WOLFORD FAMILY | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $11,985 |
| COMMUNITY EMERGENCY SERVICE | $10,000 |
| FARNSWORTH SCHOOL ORGANIZATION | $6,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| PRAIRIECARE FUND | $5,000 |
| WRAPPED IN LOVE | $4,000 |
| UNDERWOOD PUBLIC SCHOOL | $4,000 |
| TIM TEBOW FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| EAGLE HEALING NEST | $3,000 |
| HOLY CROSS LUTHERAN CHURCH | $2,000 |
| BEAUTIFUL SAVIOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER | $2,000 |
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 (FY19–24, $200k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 87% 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.
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 +25% since the first grant, against +24% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 16 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, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $74k 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
- CCCRESCENT COVE6× · 2019–2024 · $161k · revenue +173%
STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION4× · 2021–2024 · $20k · revenue +112%- EHEAGLES HEALING NEST5× · 2020–2024 · $12k · revenue +25%
Funded once
- BNBeyond New Beginningsgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +355% · 35% of their budget
- MLMAPLE LAKE HIGH SCHOOL DIST 881one grant, 2019 · $11k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $10k
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.
To eliminate hunger in south dakota.
End hunger together.
Operation of an animal shelter for unwanted and abandoned animals, community education to encourage humane treatment and responsible ownership.
At Animal Samaritans we champion compassion and respect for all living creatures, with a primary focus on dogs, cats, and the people who love them. We view pets not merely as animals, but as members of our families. As their guardians and…
Provide care for homeless/abused animals
The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.
Retrieve a golden of the midwest (ragom) rescues, fosters, and rehomes golden retrievers and golden mixes that can no longer remain in their current environments. the organization ensures each dog receives necessary veterinary care and…
A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.
The mission of the foundation for health care continuums is to strengthen each community we serve by providing a wide spectrum of housing and health care services that honor the evolving, aging population.
To care for pets, find them homes and save lives.
Pet Network rescues adoptable animals from euthanasia, connects abandoned animals with loving families, instills respect for animals through humane education, and enhances lives through animal companionship.
To save and improve the lives of companion animals by engaging communities and connecting people, resources and knowledge.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tim Tebow Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Prairiecare Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 22 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
24 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. 24 of the 84 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 CRESCENT COVE ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Lake Region Pioneer Threshermens Association ↗
- Who funds Beyond New Beginnings ↗
- Who funds EAGLES HEALING NEST ↗
- Who funds BUFFALO FOOD SHELF ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY EMERGENCY SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MUSEUM OF FOREST SERVICE HISTORY ↗
- Who funds FARNSWORTH SCHOOL ORGANIZATION INC ↗
- Who funds ASHBY LEGACY FUND ↗
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: Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · The Graco Foundation · West Central Initiative · Tradition Family Foundation · Otter Tail Power Company Foundation · The Minneapolis Foundation · Margaret a Cargill Foundation · Catholic Community Foundation of Minnesota · Communitygiving · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · The Richard M Schulze Family 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 Risbrudt-Eian Charitable 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.