· Private foundation
The David Family Foundation Inc
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.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k18 grants · $79k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $55k
- $250k+1 grant · $348k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Hudson Institute Inc | $348,000 |
| Committee for Human Rights in N Kor | $55,000 |
| Foundation for Individual Rights Ex | $10,000 |
| Manhattan Institute for Policy Rese | $10,000 |
| Institute for Justice | $10,000 |
| Metropolitan Opera | $6,500 |
| The Middle East Media Research Inst | $6,000 |
| Becket Fund | $5,000 |
| Lincoln Center Theater | $5,000 |
| United States Holocaust Memorial Mu | $5,000 |
| Center for Security Policy | $5,000 |
| Gilder Lehrman Institute of America | $5,000 |
| Connecticut FoodShare Inc | $5,000 |
| The Federalist Society | $5,000 |
| American Enterprise Institute for P | $5,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 83% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +54% since the first grant, against +24% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 23 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- HIHudson Institute Inc8× · 2017–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +242%
- IFINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE7× · 2017–2024 · $590k · revenue +57%
- TFTHE FUND FOR AMERICAN STUDIES7× · 2017–2023 · $55k · revenue +3%
Funded once
- CFCenter for Strategic Internationalone grant, 2017 · $15k
- TDThe Defense Forum Foundation Incone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +22%
UNITED SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS INCone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +24%
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 peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
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,…
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 institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
The Knight First Amendment Institute defends the freedoms of speech and the press in the digital age through strategic litigation, research, public advocacy and public education. Our aim is to promote a system of free expression that is…
The manhattan institute is a community of scholars, journalists, activists, and civic leaders dedicated to advancing opportunity, individual liberty, and the rule of law in america and its great cities.
To create a nation where everyone enjoys a fair share of our collective prosperity.
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 iib represents the interests of the international banking community before u.s. legislative/regulatory bodies liaises with international regulatory bodies serves as a source of information to the media and other interested parties…
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 University of Michigan. 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 38 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% 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 12% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 40 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 Hudson Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE FUND FOR AMERICAN STUDIES ↗
- Who funds FOUNTAIN HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds THE FEDERALIST SOCIETY FOR LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY STUDIES ↗
- Who funds COMMENTARY INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY INC ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST MEDIA AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds INTERCOLLEGIATE STUDIES INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds CONNECTICUT FOODSHARE INC ↗
- Who funds THE VIVIAN BEAUMONT THEATERINC D/B/A LINCOLN CENTER THEATER ↗
- Who funds The Becket Fund ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE DOE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds The Charlotte Hungerford Hospital ↗
- Who funds THE GEORGE W BUSH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCHOLARS INC ↗
- Who funds The Defense Forum Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds PRAGER UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE FOREIGN POLICY INITIATIVE co KLEINBERG KAPLAN ↗
- Who funds BARRY GOLDWATER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds INTERNET SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds QUINTESSENCE THEATRE GROUP 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: Donors Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 David Family Foundation Inc 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.
- Connecticut Foodshare Inc — 5% of income from government
- The Charlotte Hungerford Hospital — 3% 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.