· Private foundation
The Cream Hill Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE BARROW GROUP | $4,000 |
| DUKE UNIVERSITY | $3,500 |
| PULLIAM SCHOOL OF JOURNALISM | $3,000 |
| WEST CORNWALL PUBLIC LIBRARY | $2,500 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $2,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF CENTRAL | $2,000 |
| PARK TUDOR SCHOOL | $2,000 |
| THE BARROW GROUP | $2,000 |
| PARTNERS IN HEALTH | $2,000 |
| UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS | $2,000 |
| GIRLS FOR A CHANGE | $2,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $2,000 |
| VERMONT PUBLIC RADIO | $2,000 |
| NOISE POLLUTION CLEARINGHOUSE | $2,000 |
| GOLDSTON MIME FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY19–22, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 41% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +32% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
75 repeat relationships — 56 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 3 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; $2k 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
- IMINDIAN MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC8× · 2017–2024 · $57k · revenue +118%
- TBTHE BARROW GROUP INC8× · 2017–2024 · $37k · revenue +58%
DUKE UNIVERSITY8× · 2017–2024 · $25k · revenue +51%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $3k
- PSPULLIAM SCHOOL FOR JOURNALISMone grant, 2017 · $3k
- VCVASSAR COLLEGEone grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +19%
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 University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
New york school of interior design provides the most innovative, immersive, and transformative interior design education in the world, demonstrating the impact of professionally designed interiors on the health, happiness, and well-being…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
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.
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.
Depauw university develops leaders the world needs through an uncommon commitment to the liberal arts. depauw's diverse and inclusive learning and living experience, distinctive in its rigorous intellectual engagement and its global and…
Saint anselm is a catholic, benedictine college providing all of its students a distinctive liberal arts education that incorporates opportunities for professional and career preparation. it does so in a learning community that encourages…
Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Medecins Sans Frontieres Usa Inc and the most unlike its peers is Great Mountain Forest Corporation. 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 39 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
67 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. 67 of the 108 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 INDIAN MOUNTAIN SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds THE BARROW GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Vermont Public Radio ↗
- Who funds PARK TUDOR FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NOISE POLLUTION CLEARINGHOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds THE PERFORMANCE ZONE INC ↗
- Who funds THE FESSENDEN SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds VERMONT INSTITUTE OF NATURAL SCIENCE INC ↗
- Who funds THE INTERNATIONAL DARK-SKY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Middlebury College ↗
- Who funds The International Friends of the Marciana Library Inc ↗
- Who funds THE BREARLEY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds BENNINGTON COLLEGE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds GENIUS RECOVERY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRACTURED ATLAS INC ↗
- Who funds HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE HOTCHKISS SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds Davidson College ↗
- Who funds Naropa University ↗
- Who funds INDIANA CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF INDIANA INC ↗
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: United Way of Central Indiana Inc · Lilly Endowment Inc · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Central Indiana Community Foundation Inc · Griffith Family Foundation Inc · The Brave Heart Foundation Inc · Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust · Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · The Indianapolis Foundation Inc · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Ford 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 The Cream Hill 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Cornwall Conservation Trust Inc — 30% of income from government
- Connecticut Forest & Park Association — 16% of income from government
- The Open Door Shelter Inc — 14% of income from government
- American Whitewater — 5% of income from government
- Noise Pollution Clearinghouse Inc — 1% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Middlebury College — 1% of income from government
- Als One Inc — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- The Fessenden School — 0% of income from government
- Bennington College Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Vermont Institute of Natural Science Inc — 0% of income from government
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.