Skip to content
Steven & Kiki Esrick Dream Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Steven & Kiki Esrick Dream Foundation Inc

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.

$818k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$381k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$4.9MHuman Services$261kEducation$178kYouth Development$141kReligion$114kInternational$108kRecreation & Sports$82kEnvironment$62kOther$0
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $109k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $313k
  • $250k+1 grant · $381k
$10,500
Median grant
9
States reached
$871k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NICKLAUS CHILDRENS HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION$381,000
HOPE CENTER DONATION$150,000
ASPEN HOPE CENTER$110,000
BUILDING FUTURES PROJECT$52,500
PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION$40,000
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY$25,000
Individual grant recipient$19,000
ACTION IN AFRICA$14,150
ASPEN VALLEY SKI-SNOWBOARD CLUB$10,500
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF PALM BEACH COUNTY$3,627
DUCKS UNLIMITED$3,500
INTERNATIONAL ESPERANZA PROJECT$2,766
MENORAH MANOR FOUNDATION$2,500
MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER (MSK)$1,000
WARRIORS RENEWAL COALITION$1,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–25, $82k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%LOVE FOR HUMANITY: $100 → 14%CHALLENGE ASPEN: $3k → 6%WISH FOR WHEELS: $250 → 8%THIRD OPTION FOUNDATION: $20k → 6%BUILDING FUTURES PROJECT: $53k → 8%CHALLENGE ASPEN: $250 → 6%WINDWALKERS: $6k → 6%WINDWALKERS: $500 → 6%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
WI
NY
MA
OH
CT
CA
UT
CO
MO
KY
VA
MD
TN
DC
TX
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.7M · 31 repeat orgs$485k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +114% since the first grant, against +42% for those funded once.

31 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 23 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

31
35

Total granted

$5.7M
$272k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+114%
+42%

Still filing today

71%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $212k 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
HealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureInternationalRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • NC
    Nicklaus Children's Health Care Foundation
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.6M · revenue +44%
  • AH
    ASPEN HOPE CENTER
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +420%
  • TB
    THE BUDDY PROGRAM INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $69k · revenue +52%

Funded once

  • WI
    WORLDSERVE INTERNATIONAL
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -2%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN KIDS CANCER FUND
    one grant, 2021 · $35k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $30k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
2
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
3
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
4
International Biomedical Research Alliance

Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.

Health
5
Allosource

Inspired by the gift of donation from our communities, allosource responsibly provides innovative cellular and tissue allografts to advance patient healing.

Health
6
Asco Association

Asco association promotes the common business interests of its members by: (1) advocating for policies that improve the quality of cancer care; (2) maintaining the highest standards of oncology medical care through programs supporting…

Community Improvement
7
Seattle Biomedical Research Institute

We conduct fundamental infectious disease research to generate critical new knowledge about pathogens and their interactions with see schedule o for continuationhumans to enable the discovery and development of novel interventions,…

—
8
American Society of Clinical Oncology Inc

See schedule o:asco is a professional oncology society committed to conquering cancer through research, education, and promotion of the highest quality patient care.

Health
9
United States Naval Institute

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.

—
10
City of Hope

City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
11
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric Aids Foundation

The elizabeth glaser pediatric aids foundation (egpaf) is a proven leader in the fight against pediatric hiv/aids and has reached over 33 million pregnant women with services to prevent transmission of hiv to their babies. to date, egpaf…

Health
12
University Family Physicians Inc

Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is Warriors Renewal Coalition Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

52 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 52 of the 79 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
15
Early backer (in before they grew)
52/52
Grantees still filing
38/52
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Nicklaus Children's Health Care Foundation: $3,633,622 · PhilanthropyNicklaus Children's Health Care Foundation+4 more: $48,150 · PhilanthropyASPEN HOPE CENTER: $1,136,250 · HealthASPEN HOPE CENTER+11 more: $72,906 · Health+11 moreHOPE CENTER DONATION: $150,000 · OtherHOPE CENTER DONATI…Individual grant recipient: $132,240 · OtherIndividual grant r…UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI HILLEL: $100,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MIAM…Individual grant recipient: $80,300 · OtherIndividual grant r…THE BUDDY PROGRAM INC: $68,831 · OtherTHE BUDDY PROGRAM …OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $64,560 · OtherOHIO STATE UNIVERS…UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN KIDS CANCER FUND: $35,000 · OtherUniversity of Miami: $60,000 · OtherUniversity of Miam…THE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC: $61,820 · OtherTHE EVERGLADES FOU…ASPEN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $50,000 · Other+37 more: $235,583 · Other+37 moreACTION IN AFRICA INC: $51,627 · InternationalWORLDSERVE INTERNATIONAL: $50,000 · International+2 more: $5,766 · InternationalBUILDING FUTURES PROJECT INC: $52,500 · Human ServicesTHIRD OPTION FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Human ServicesWINDWALKERS EQUINE ASSISTED LEARNING AND: $6,250 · Human ServicesCHALLENGE ASPEN: $2,750 · Human Services+2 more: $350 · Human ServicesASPEN VALLEY SKISNOWBOARD CLUB INC: $43,000 · Recreation & SportsUnited States Ski Team Foundation: $25,000 · Recreation & SportsSHINING STARS FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Recreation & SportsBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF PBC: $65,627 · Youth Development+1 more: $1,700 · Youth Development
Philanthropy$3,681,772Health$1,209,156Other$1,038,334International$107,393Human Services$81,850Recreation & Sports$73,000Youth Development$67,327

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNicklaus Children's Health Care Foundation: $3,633,622 over 9y, 9.6% of budgetASPEN HOPE CENTER: $1,136,250 over 9y, 7.0% of budgetTHE BUDDY PROGRAM INC: $68,831 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF PBC: $65,627 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetTHE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC: $61,820 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetUniversity of Miami: $60,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBUILDING FUTURES PROJECT INC: $52,500 over 1y, 10% of budgetACTION IN AFRICA INC: $51,627 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetASPEN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetWORLDSERVE INTERNATIONAL: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetASPEN VALLEY SKISNOWBOARD CLUB INC: $43,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetBIG DOG RANCH RESCUE INC: $29,910 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetUnited States Ski Team Foundation: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPEDIATRIC ONCOLOGY SUPPORT TEAM INC: $24,085 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetTHIRD OPTION FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetOcean Healing Group Inc: $15,000 over 3y, 100% of budgetSTOP CHILDREN'S CANCER INC: $14,935 over 5y, 3.3% of budgetNATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $13,850 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $12,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPIONEER WORKS ART FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD: $8,090 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetASPEN ART MUSEUM: $7,750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE HOMETOWN FOUNDATION INC: $7,050 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $6,360 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWINDWALKERS EQUINE ASSISTED LEARNING AND: $6,250 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetTAMPA BAY RESEACH INSTITUTE: $6,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetSHINING STARS FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFREDERICK RESCUE MISSION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMENORAH MANOR FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetPATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Esperanza Project: $2,766 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHALLENGE ASPEN: $2,750 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRACTURED ATLAS INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGULF COAST JEWISH FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOrange Bowl Committee Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TONY ROBBINS FOUNDATION: $2,325 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF FREDERICK COUNTY MARYLAND INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBAL DOWN SYNDROME FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL MIDWIFE ASSISTANCE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHumane Society of Tampa Bay Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWish for Wheels Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAIDS Foundation of Chicago: $111 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOVE FOR HUMANITY: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAYPAL CHARITABLE GIVING FUND: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOUR RESCUE: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds Nicklaus Children's Health Care Foundation ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN HOPE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE BUDDY PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF PBC ↗
  • Who funds THE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds University of Miami ↗
  • Who funds BUILDING FUTURES PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds ACTION IN AFRICA INC ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WORLDSERVE INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN VALLEY SKISNOWBOARD CLUB INC ↗
  • Who funds PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BIG DOG RANCH RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds United States Ski Team Foundation ↗
  • Who funds PEDIATRIC ONCOLOGY SUPPORT TEAM INC ↗
  • Who funds THIRD OPTION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Ocean Healing Group Inc ↗
  • Who funds STOP CHILDREN'S CANCER INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH ↗
  • Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds PIONEER WORKS ART FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NETWORK FOR GOOD ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN ART MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds THE HOMETOWN FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WINDWALKERS EQUINE ASSISTED LEARNING AND ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Aspen Community Found…Colorado Gives Founda…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Big Blue Sky Foundati…Jamie Tisch FoundationWilliam & Lynda Steer…Arches FoundationCastaways FoundationThe Thendara Foundati…Enterprise Holdings F…Morgan Stanley Global…The Chicago Community…
Aspen Community FoundationCO17.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Aspen Community Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Big Blue Sky Foundation · Jamie Tisch Foundation · William & Lynda Steere Foundation · Arches Foundation · Castaways Foundation · The Thendara Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Chicago Community Trust

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Steven & Kiki Esrick Dream Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Steven & Kiki Esrick Dream Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 110%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Gulf Coast Jewish Family and Community Services Inc: 15% of income from government
  • University of Miami: 5% of income from government
  • Big Dog Ranch Rescue Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Orange Bowl Committee Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
11get no government money at all
10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 79 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

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

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Steven & Kiki Esrick Dream’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home