· Private foundation
Ropchan Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NICHES LAND TRUST INC | $15,000 |
| LC NATURE PARK INC | $7,500 |
| LITTLE RIVER WETLANDS PROJECT INC | $2,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 95% of your 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.
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 +83% since the first grant, against +51% for the ones you funded once.
7 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
- SLSYCAMORE LAND TRUST INCORPORATED5× · 2017–2024 · $83k · revenue +44%
- FWFORT WAYNE TRAILS INC4× · 2017–2024 · $38k · revenue +53%
- AIACRES Inc3× · 2018–2024 · $25k · revenue +370%
Funded once
- TCTHE CONSERVATION LAW CENTER INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $11k · revenue +51%
- PCPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH USAone grant, 2019 · $8k
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.
The central indiana land trust, inc. preserves the best of central indiana's natural areas, protecting plants and animals, so hoosiers can experience the wonder of the state's natural heritage.
Red-tail land conservancy preserves, protects, and restores natural areas and farm land in east central indiana while increasing awareness of our natural heritage.
Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…
The mission of the Organization is the conservation of the natural resources of the Lakes Region of New Hampshire, the preservation of wildlife habitat, the stewardship of lands that define the character of the region and its quality of…
To preserve and restore natural lands and waters in northwestern indiana, and to engage people in nature and conservation
The mission of the lancaster county conservancy is "providing wild and forested lands and clean waterways for our community forever". the charitable purposes of the lancaster county conservancy include preservation of natural lands,…
To conserve natural land and open space - including forests, wetlands, meadows, agricultural lands, and places of scenic beauty - to provide habitat for wildlife and to enrich the lives of people.
Land conservation and restoration for public benefit
The Indiana Wildlife Federation (IWF) is a statewide, nonprofit conservation organization, with the mission to promote the conservation, sound management, and sustainable use of Indianas wildlife and wildlife habitat through education,…
To protect the natural heritage and rural character of the greater Livingston County area by preserving quality natural areas and productive farmland. To promote an appreciation and understanding of the environment for the long term…
To conserve, sustain, and connect natural areas, land, and waters that make the places we live special
The mission of heartlands conservancy is to empower and colaborate with the people of southern illinois to advance and protect the health of our distinctive communities and nationally significant natural and cultural resources.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sycamore Land Trust Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is Little River Wetlands Project Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 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. 8 of the 10 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.
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: Nisource Charitable Foundation · M E Raker Foundation Inc · English-Bonter-Mitchell Fdn · The Nature Conservancy · Laura Hare Charitable Trust · O'Rourke Schof Family Foundation · Magee-O'Connor Foundation Inc I/C/O Mr Douglas E Miller · Edward D & Ione Auer Foundation Monarch Capital David Meyer Trustee · McMillen Foundation Inc · Edward M Wilson Foundation · Community Foundation of Greater Fort Wayne Inc · Lincoln Financial Foundation Inc
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 Ropchan 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.
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.