· Private foundation
Springview Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE | $40,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS IN | $35,000 |
| MOVING PICTURE INSTITUTE | $30,000 |
| THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE | $30,000 |
| ACTON INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF | $25,000 |
| THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| EMERGENT ORDER FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| NETWORK OF ENLIGHTENED WOMEN | $20,000 |
| LIBERTAS INSTITUTE | $20,000 |
| TURNING POINT USA INC | $20,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC EDUCATION | $20,000 |
| THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY | $20,000 |
| AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE | $15,000 |
| PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE | $10,000 |
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 (FY21–24, $140k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 29% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +29% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 6 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, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- IFINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE4× · 2021–2024 · $165k · revenue +46%
- MPMOVING PICTURE INSTITUTE4× · 2021–2024 · $110k · revenue +8%
- TITHE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE4× · 2021–2024 · $110k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- CFCOMMUNNITY FDN OF HOLLAND ZEELANDone grant, 2020 · $200k
- DTDONORS TRUSTone grant, 2020 · $105k
- TSTHE STEAMBOAT INSTITUTEgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +56%
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 advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…
The international leadership institute (ili) changes history by accelerating the spread of the gospel through training and mobilizing leaders of leaders to reach their nations. ili accomplishes this purpose through cutting edge leadership…
Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.
The quincy institute promotes ideas that move u.s. foreign policy away from endless war and toward vigorous diplomacy in the pursuit of international peace. qi's staff and non-resident experts expose the costs and consequences of…
First liberty institute provides pro bono legal services to advance and defend religious liberty for individuals, churches, and other ministries and organizations.
Hudson Institute is a research organization promoting American leadership for a secure, free, and prosperous future.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Support public interest litigators by leveraging resources and creating opportunities for collaboration to advance freedom under the rule of law.
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
The mission of the cato institute is to keep the principles, ideas, and moral case for liberty alive for future generations, while moving public policy in the direction of individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peace.
To foster freedom of speech, a competitive media and communications industry, and excellence in journalism.
The Center of Theological Inquiry is an independent research institution with an international visiting scholar program which convenes researchers in an ideal setting for interdisciplinary inquiries where theology casts light on global…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies and the most unlike its peers is Equest Center for Therapeutic Riding Inc. 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 33 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
28 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. 28 of the 35 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 INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds MOVING PICTURE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds DONORS TRUST ↗
- Who funds Foundation for Economic Education Inc ↗
- Who funds THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY FOR LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY STUDIES ↗
- Who funds Emergent Order Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NETWORK OF ENLIGHTENED WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds Libertas Network ↗
- Who funds ENCOMPASSKIDS ↗
- Who funds PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TURNING POINT USA INC ↗
- Who funds WEDGWOOD CHRISTIAN SERVICES ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds GRANT ME HOPE ↗
- Who funds LAKESHORE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
- Who funds Equest Center for Therapeutic Riding Inc ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE DEFENDING FREEDOM ↗
- Who funds Leadership Institute ↗
- Who funds THE STEAMBOAT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Mercatus Center Inc ↗
- Who funds 70 X 7 LIFE RECOVERY ↗
- Who funds RESILIENCE ADVOCATES FOR ENDING VIOLENCE ↗
- Who funds HOSPICE OF HOLLAND INC ↗
- Who funds Young Voices ↗
- Who funds New Civil Liberties Alliance ↗
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: The Community Foundation of the Holland/Zeeland Area Inc · Adolph Coors Foundation · The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation Inc · The Dunn Foundation · Peter C & Emajean Cook Foundation · Dick and Betsy Devos Family Foundation · Charles Koch Foundation · Donors Trust Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Christian Community Foundation Inc · Bartley J Madden Foundation · Pierre F & Enid Goodrich 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 Springview 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Springview Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Springview 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.