· Private foundation
The Eric T and Elizabeth C Jacobsen Foundation In care of Align Impact
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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 52% of The Eric T and Elizabeth C Jacobsen Foundation In care of Align Impact’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k4 grants · $11k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $87k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ImpactAssets - EJF DAF | $25,000 |
| People's Health Clinic | $21,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| Atmos | $20,000 |
| Capital Instituteorg | $5,000 |
| WF Community Foundation | $2,950 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| Concert Against Cancer | $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 (FY18–21, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 38% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 19% of The Eric T and Elizabeth C Jacobsen Foundation In care of Align Impact’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +77% since the first grant, against +49% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 5 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, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $48k 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
- PHPeople's Health Clicnic4× · 2021–2024 · $49k · revenue +7%
- SPST PAUL'S SCHOOL3× · 2017–2020 · $33k · revenue +127%
- RHREPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACCESS PROJECT INC2× · 2020–2022 · $2k · revenue +77%
Funded once
- MBMANCHESTER BIDWELL CORPORATIONone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +13%
- UPUtah Pride Center Incgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +131%
MS FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +608%
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 purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Working with our world-class network of innovators, business and industry leaders, and policy experts, we accelerate the innovation of climate technologies at every stage - from discovery to development to deployment.
The Foundation was created to assist in the promotion, development and enhancement of the financial resources for Washburn University of Topeka, as well as to receive and hold in trust any assets given in benefit of the University.
Supporting industry transformation towards climate-positive and make green careers transitions and driving the adoption of green workforce development practices broadly.
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
As a leading charitable foundation and healthcare advocacy organization, the pan foundation is dedicated to accelerating access to treatment for those who need it most and empowering patients on their healthcare journeys. we provide…
To lead, serve and collaborate to mobilize enduring philanthropy for a better arizona.
The institute for protein innovation is advancing protein science to accelerate research and improve human health.
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
Utah foundation's mission is to produce objective, thorough and well- reasoned research and analysis that promotes the effective use of public resources, a thriving economy, a well-prepared workforce and a high quality of life for utahns.…
To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.
The foundation is set up to deliver one program - look good feel better. the mission of this nationwide program is to improve the quality of life of women, men, and teens undergoing cancer treatment by offering advice on how to cope with…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ms Foundation for Women Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hamiltons ferret haven. 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 22 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
24 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. 24 of the 41 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 IMPACTASSETSINC ↗
- Who funds People's Health Clicnic ↗
- Who funds ST PAUL'S SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds MANCHESTER BIDWELL CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Utah Pride Center Inc ↗
- Who funds MS FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds ATMOS LTD ↗
- Who funds AKIPTAN INC ↗
- Who funds Camp Kesem National ↗
- Who funds WHITEFISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Park City Education Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE URBAN FOOD INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds Day II Day Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF FROST FREE LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds RAVENSWOOD EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH ACCESS PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds DeliverFund ↗
- Who funds BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds Concert Against Cancer ↗
- Who funds Hamiltons ferret haven ↗
- Who funds COLORADO GIVES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CRICKETS HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds THE DR DALE B HULL FOUNDATION FOR NEUROLOGICAL REHABILITATION 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: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Impactassetsinc · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 Eric T and Elizabeth C Jacobsen Foundation In care of Align Impact 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.
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.