Skip to content
The Antero Charitable Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Antero Charitable Foundation Inc

Its FY2017 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$57k
Granted FY2017
8
Grants FY2017
7
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01FY2017 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k5 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $45k
$5,400
Median grant
7
States reached
$191k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FOUNDATION FOR THE DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACIES INC$25,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN CHILDRENS LAW CENTER$10,000
WELLSHIRE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$10,000
OKLAHOMA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$5,400
DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS CHARITABLE SERVICE TRUS$1,800
RURAL EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT INC$1,800
THE ELEPHANT SANCTUARY IN TENNESSEE$1,800
ANOTHER CHILD FOUNDATION$1,000
02The need
02

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 (FY17–17, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%RURAL EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT INC: $2k → 10%ANOTHER CHILD FOUNDATION: $1k → 17%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.
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 field
03the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 8 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Foundation for the Defense of Democracies Inc: $25,000 · InternationalFoundation for the Defense of Democracies IncROCKY MOUNTAIN CHILDREN'S LAW CENTER: $10,000 · Crime & LegalROCKY MOUNTAIN CHIL…WELLSHIRE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $10,000 · OtherWELLSHIRE PRESBYTER…Oklahoma State University Foundation: $5,400 · EducationOklahoma S…RURAL EDUCATION & DEVELOPMENT INC: $1,800 · Human ServicesANOTHER CHILD FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesDisabled American Veterans (DAV) Charitable Service Trust: $1,800 · Public BenefitTHE ELEPHANT SANCTUARY IN TENNESSEE: $1,800 · Animals
International$25,000Crime & Legal$10,000Other$10,000Education$5,400Human Services$2,800Public Benefit$1,800Animals$1,800

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFoundation for the Defense of Democracies Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetOklahoma State University Foundation: $5,400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDisabled American Veterans (DAV) Charitable Service Trust: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRURAL EDUCATION & DEVELOPMENT INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE ELEPHANT SANCTUARY IN TENNESSEE: $1,800 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.

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.

National Philanthropi…Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA11.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 The Antero Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Antero Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Antero Charitable Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to The Antero Charitable Foundation Inc 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.

    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 8 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Antero’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