Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Claude Bennett Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$37k
Granted FY2025still arriving
19
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$14k
Largest
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$120kArts & Culture$70kHealth$68kEducation$39kAnimals$26kHuman Services$21kYouth Development$3kFood & Nutrition$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k18 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $14k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UAB$14,000
ALZHEIMER'S OF CENTRAL ALABAMA$4,300
SOUTH HIGHLAND PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$4,000
ST LUKES$3,250
HEARTS AND HORSES$1,500
REALITIES FOR CHILDREN$1,500
UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK$1,000
WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY$1,000
ALABAMA SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$1,000
DENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION$1,000
UCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION$750
GENESIS PROJECT$750
COLORADO WILDLIFE CENTER$500
SOUTH HIGHLAND CENTER$500
BIRMINGHAM AIDS OUTREACH$500
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 (FY17–24, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SERVE 68: $3k → 11%SERVE 68: $2k → 11%SERVE 68: $1k → 11%SERVE 68: $1k → 11%SERVE 68: $1k → 11%SERVE 68: $800 → 11%SERVE 68: $500 → 11%SERVE 68: $500 → 11%CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $500 → 16%CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $500 → 16%CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $250 → 16%CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $250 → 16%CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $200 → 16%CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $200 → 16%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

WA
MN
PA
CA
CO
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
AL
GA
TX
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.
$337k · 40 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

40 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 28 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

40
17

Total granted

$337k
$12k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+70%

Still filing today

38%
24%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
AnimalsHuman ServicesHealthReligionEducationFood & NutritionOther
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

  • AO
    ALZHEIMERS OF CENTRAL ALABAMA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $51k · revenue +52%
  • TW
    THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $12k · revenue +124%
  • DZ
    DENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2025 · $11k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • SB
    STAR BOOSTER CLUB
    one grant, 2019 · $2k
  • PV
    POUDRE VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $2k
  • TC
    TIMBERLINE CHURCH
    one grant, 2018 · $2k
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
Colorado Animal Rescue Inc

C.A.R.E's mission is practicing excellence in the animal care, education, and advocacy to connect pets to their people.

Animals
2
Animal Rescue of the Rockies

Animal Care and Adoption - ARR's mission is to save the lives of homeless and abandoned dogs and cats. Our goal is reaching a no-kill society in the United States.

Animals
3
Rocky Mountain Wild

Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…

Environment
4
Colorado Horse Rescue

Our mission is to build a better future for horses by continuously reimagining what's possible and creating a reality where safe solutions exist for every horse.

Animals
5
Adoption Options

Adoption options is a non-profit,colorado corporation, dedicated to providing the state of colorado with a range of private, non-secretarian child placement services.

Human Services
6
Nature and Raptor Center of Pueblo

The agency is a conservation Center near Pueblo, CO, where land and people can provide unique experiences in education, conservation and recreation that inspire responsible environmental stewardship.

—
7
Carolina Raptor Center Inc

Environmental stewardship, education, research, and rehabilitation of injured birds of prey

Animals
8
Colorado Center On Law and Policy

Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.

Crime & Legal
9
Noco Humane

Our mission is to further the compassionate safe and responsible relationship between animals and people.

Animals
10
A Shared Vision Partners in Pediatric Blindness and Visual Imp

A Shared Vision educates, inspires, and empowers families to nurture the development of their young children who are blind or visually impaired. We provide early intervention vision services in families' homes and community settings…

Health
11
The California Wildlife Center

The california wildlife center (cwc) takes responsibility for the protection of all native wildlife through rehabilitiation, education and conservation. as the los angeles area's premier wildlife medical care and rehabilitation facility,…

Health
12
Northern Colorado Rehab Center Inc Dba the Ark Sober Living Home

Christian Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation Facility

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Realities for Children Charities; the most unlike its peers is Laos Literacy 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.
04the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 64 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
18/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOUTH HIGHLAND PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $71,450 · OtherSOUTH HIGHLAND PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHALZHEIMERS OF CENTRAL ALABAMA INC: $51,200 · OtherALZHEIMERS OF CENTRAL ALABAMA INCALABAMA SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA: $41,000 · OtherALABAMA SYMPHONY ORCHESTRAHEARTS AND HORSES: $26,500 · OtherHEARTS AND HORSESUNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK: $15,000 · OtherGENESIS PROJECT OF FORT COLLINS: $14,250 · OtherUAB: $14,000 · Other+44 more: $81,950 · Other+44 moreTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $12,000 · AnimalsDENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION: $10,900 · AnimalsNORTHERN COLORADO WILDLIFE CENTER: $2,400 · Animals+1 more: $300 · AnimalsSERVE 6 8: $9,050 · Human ServicesCHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY OF ALABAMA: $1,900 · Human ServicesTHE CATECHESIS OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD INC: $3,600 · ReligionPRESBYTERIAN FRONTIER FELLOWSHIP: $2,550 · ReligionBirmingham AIDS Outreach Inc: $4,800 · HealthCAHABA VALLEY HEALTH CARE INC: $450 · HealthREALITIES FOR CHILDREN CHARITIES: $1,500 · PhilanthropyGOUCHER COLLEGE: $1,000 · EducationRhodes College: $450 · Education
Other$315,350Animals$25,600Human Services$10,950Religion$6,150Health$5,250Philanthropy$1,500Education$1,450

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetALZHEIMERS OF CENTRAL ALABAMA INC: $51,200 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $12,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION: $10,900 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetSERVE 6 8: $9,050 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetCHILDHAVEN: $8,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetUCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION: $5,550 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBirmingham AIDS Outreach Inc: $4,800 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CATECHESIS OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD INC: $3,600 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetPRESBYTERIAN FRONTIER FELLOWSHIP: $2,550 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHERN COLORADO WILDLIFE CENTER: $2,400 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetCHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY OF ALABAMA: $1,900 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetREALITIES FOR CHILDREN CHARITIES: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGOUCHER COLLEGE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Food Bank for Larimer County: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCRISIS CENTER INC: $850 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRhodes College: $450 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLaos Literacy Project Inc: $400 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetDALLAS CAT LADY: $300 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSTUDIO BY THE TRACKS INC: $250 over 1y, 0.1% 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 ALZHEIMERS OF CENTRAL ALABAMA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds DENVER ZOOLOGICAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SERVE 6 8 ↗
  • Who funds CHILDHAVEN ↗
  • Who funds UCHEALTH NORTHERN COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Birmingham AIDS Outreach Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE CATECHESIS OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD INC ↗
  • Who funds PRESBYTERIAN FRONTIER FELLOWSHIP ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN COLORADO WILDLIFE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY OF ALABAMA ↗
  • Who funds REALITIES FOR CHILDREN CHARITIES ↗
  • Who funds GOUCHER COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds The Food Bank for Larimer County ↗

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.

Community Foundation of Northern ColoradoCO17.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Northern Colorado · The Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham · Robert R Meyer Foundation · Protective Life Foundation · Otter Cares Foundation AKA OTTERCARES FOUNDATION · The Joseph S Bruno Charitable Foundation · United Way of Central Alabama Inc · Hill Crest Foundation Inc · Orlean & Ralph W Beeson Fund · The Daniel Foundation of Alabama · Alabama Power Foundation Inc · Colorado Gives 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 Claude Bennett Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Claude Bennett Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Goucher College: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Claude Bennett Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Claude Bennett Family 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.

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 64 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 Claude Bennett Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph