Skip to content
The Edward E Hills Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

The Edward E Hills Fund

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.

$428k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

International$575kPublic Benefit$512kEducation$313kHealth$195kAnimals$147kArts & Culture$54kSocial Science$40kPublic Safety & Disaster$36kOther$0
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $41k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $87k
  • $250k+1 grant · $300k
$5,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
STANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER$300,000
THE MAVEN PROJECT$35,000
MERCY SHIPS$12,000
PILOTS TO THE RESCUE INC$10,000
HOOVER INSTITUTION - STANFORD UNIVE$10,000
NOAH'S LOST ARK$10,000
TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION$10,000
WOODSIDE - PORTOLA VALLEY FIRE FDN$7,000
IRONDOG K9 INTERNATIONAL INC$5,000
SAN FRANCISCO SPCA ADOPTION CENTER$5,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS$5,000
CHIMP HAVEN$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
THE JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE$2,500
BABY RHINO RESCUE$2,500
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 (FY22–25, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 3% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ORPHAN ACRES INC: $1k → 16%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $13k → 10%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $8k → 10%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $5k → 10%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $3k → 10%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

ID
IL
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
IN
CA
UT
CO
VA
MD
AZ
NM
NC
DC
LA
GA
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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 28 repeat orgs$360k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +12% since the first grant, against +6% for those funded once.

28 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

28
25

Total granted

$1.6M
$50k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+12%
+6%

Still filing today

57%
68%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 28% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $310k 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
AnimalsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesInternationalArts & CultureHealthOther
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

  • TM
    THE MAVEN PROJECT
    4× · 2021–2025 · $185k · revenue +64%
  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    4× · 2022–2025 · $29k · revenue +23%
  • BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY
    2× · 2022–2024 · $20k · revenue +5%

Funded once

  • AA
    ALAQUA ANIMAL REFUGE INC
    one grant, 2024 · $7k · revenue 0%
  • AA
    Animals' Angels Incorporated
    one grant, 2024 · $6k · revenue +9%
  • LM
    LOST MEADOWS MULE REFUGE
    one grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue 0%
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
Marin Humane Society

Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.

Animals
2
United Animal Nations Dba Redrover

To bring animals out of crisis and strengthen the bond between people and animals through emergency sheltering, disaster relief services, financial assistance and education. redrover accomplishes its mission by engaging volunteers and…

—
3
Animal Care Sanctuary

Animal care sanctuary's lifesaving mission as a no kill organization envisions a community that promotes turning compassion into action for companion animals by: 1.) adopting healthy pet companions into loving homes. 2.) promoting the…

Animals
4
Santa Barbara Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Santa barbara humane operates two campuses located in santa barbara and santa maria providing care for community-owned and homeless animals. both campuses offer affordable high quality veterinary care, compassionate behavior training…

Animals
5
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
6
Wildlife Sos

Protecting india's precious wildlife from poaching, habitat loss, and human exploitation since 1995.

Animals
7
Partners for Animal Welfare Society

Animal shelter for the protection and care of abused and neglected animals.

Animals
8
Animal Outlook Inc

Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

Animals
9
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
10
Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

Animals
11
Barn Sanctuary

Rescue farmed animals and inspire people to embrace a plant-based lifestyle.

Animals
12
The Humane Society for Seattleking County

Seattle humane promotes the human-animal bond by saving and serving pets in need, regardless of age, ability, circumstance or geography.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alaqua Animal Refuge Inc; the most unlike its peers is The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 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

36 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. 36 of the 58 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)
36/36
Grantees still filing
21/36
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FREEMAN SPOGLI INSTITUTE - STANFORD: $550,000 · OtherFREEMAN SPOGLI INSTITUTE - STANFORDSTANFORD - DRAPER HILLS FELLOWS: $508,787 · OtherSTANFORD - DRAPER HILLS FELLOWSSTANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: $300,000 · OtherSTANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER+29 more: $221,946 · Other+29 moreTHE MAVEN PROJECT: $185,000 · HealthTHE MAVEN …BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $20,000 · AnimalsMUTTVILLE: $8,500 · AnimalsJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $8,000 · AnimalsALAQUA ANIMAL REFUGE INC: $7,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR RESCUED ANIMALS DBA TIGER CREEK ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $6,500 · AnimalsAnimals' Angels Incorporated: $5,500 · AnimalsCHIMP HAVEN INC: $5,000 · AnimalsRED BELL RUN FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 · AnimalsLOST MEADOWS MULE REFUGE: $3,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL GREYHOUND FOUNDATION INC: $3,000 · Animals+8 more: $12,000 · AnimalsAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $28,500 · Human ServicesORPHAN ACRES INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesMercy Ships International: $20,000 · InternationalThe American Himalayan Foundation: $4,500 · InternationalSAN FRANCISCO BALLET ASSOCIATION: $15,000 · Arts & CultureThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $2,000 · Arts & CultureSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $12,500 · Education
Other$1,580,733Health$185,000Animals$82,000Human Services$29,500International$24,500Arts & Culture$17,000Education$12,500

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 budgetTHE MAVEN PROJECT: $185,000 over 4y, 4.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $28,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMercy Ships International: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO BALLET ASSOCIATION: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $12,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetIRONDOG K9 INTERNATIONAL INC: $11,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING FUND: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FREE CLINIC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMUTTVILLE: $8,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $8,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWOODSIDE-PORTOLA VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetALAQUA ANIMAL REFUGE INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR RESCUED ANIMALS DBA TIGER CREEK ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $6,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAnimals' Angels Incorporated: $5,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCHIMP HAVEN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe American Himalayan Foundation: $4,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRED BELL RUN FOUNDATION INC: $3,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLOST MEADOWS MULE REFUGE: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL GREYHOUND FOUNDATION INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetJohn Burton Advocates for Youth: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPacific Research Institute For Public Policy: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWHITE WOLF SANCTUARY: $2,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION CAUCUS FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE KINDNESS RANCH ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKeepers of the Wild: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetORPHAN ACRES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFEEDING PETS OF THE HOMELESS AKA PETS OF THE HOMELESS: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEquine Voices Rescue & Sanctuary: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFARM SANCTUARY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCITYTEAM MINISTRIES: $500 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.

The Susan and Ford Sc…Bradford Family Found…Seckinger Foundation …Amg Charitable Gift F…Surendra and Karen Gu…Joyce a Ward Foundati…Farrell Family Founda…Rhm Foundation IncRatna Sabapathy Famil…Gat Family FoundationPC Fund for Animals C…Bernard Weinberg Foun…
The Susan and Ford Schumann FoundationAZ28.4× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Susan and Ford Schumann Foundation · Bradford Family Foundation · Seckinger Foundation Corporation · Amg Charitable Gift Foundation · Surendra and Karen Gupta Arc Foundation · Joyce a Ward Foundation · Farrell Family Foundation · Rhm Foundation Inc · Ratna Sabapathy Family Foundation I · Gat Family Foundation · PC Fund for Animals Charitable Tr · Bernard Weinberg 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 Edward E Hills Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Edward E Hills Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    4get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 58 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 Edward E Hills’ 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