Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Fitzgerald Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$19k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
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.

Community Improvement$54kReligion$25kInternational$24kHealth$9kEducation$8kYouth Development$4kPhilanthropy$3kScience & Tech$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$1,343
Median grant
3
States reached
$148k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HERE'S LIFE AFRICA$10,000
HAVERFORD COLLEGE$3,379
NEW LIFE CHRISTIAN CHURCH$2,000
Individual grant recipient$1,343
MOBILE HOPE$1,000
THE LOUDOUN SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA ASSOCIATION INC$500
BIKE THE US FOR MS$500
LOUDOUN COUNTY FIRE & RESCUE$276
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 5%. 82% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 5%HAVERFORD COLLEGE: $3k → 10%HERE'S LIFE AFRICA: $10k → 5%NEW LIFE MINISTRIES: $3k → 14%CORNERSTONE CHAPEL: $8k → 4%NEW LIFE COMMUNITY CHURCH: $600 → 6%CAPITAL CHURCH (PASTOR AMOS): $2k → 6%WILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: $21k → 7%JTCC FOUNDATION: $2k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF MARY WASHINGTON: $1k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: $344 → 11%HAVERFORD COLLEGE: $971 → 10%HERE'S LIFE AFRICA: $10k → 5%NEW LIFE MINISTRIES: $600 → 14%MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZED CHARITIES: $2k → 4%NEW LIFE COMMUNITY CHURCH: $600 → 6%CAPITAL CHURCH: $2k → 6%WILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: $16k → 7%JTCC FOUNDATION: $1k → 7%UNIVERSITY OF MARY WASHINGTON: $1k → 15%HAVERFORD COLLEGE: $950 → 10%HERE'S LIFE AFRICA: $2k → 5%MOBILE HOPE: $2k → 4%NEW LIFE CHRISTIAN CHURCH: $2k → 6%WILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: $5k → 7%HAVERFORD COLLEGE: $500 → 10%HERE'S LIFE AFRICA: $2k → 5%MISCELLANEOUS ORGANIZED CHARITIES: $1k → 4%CPMSAC: $250 → 6%WILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: $5k → 7%MOBILE HOPE: $1k → 4%NOVA SCIENCE CENTER FOUNDATION: $2k → 6%WILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: $1k → 7%MOBILE HOPE: $1k → 4%NOVA SCIENCE CENTER FOUNDATION: $500 → 6%LOUDOUN COUNTY FIRE & RESCUE: $276 → 4%CENTER FOR ADVANCED HEALTH & WELLNESS: $3k → 6%TREE OF LIFE: $3k → 4%CENTER FOR ADVANCED HEALTH & WELLNESS: $2k → 6%TREE OF LIFE: $2k → 4%CENTER FOR ADVANCED HEALTH & WELLNESS: $2k → 6%PURCELLVILLE FIRE DEPARTMENT: $700 → 4%CENTER FOR ADVANCED HEALTH & WELLNESS: $2k → 6%PURCELLVILLE BAPTIST CHURCH: $500 → 4%FELLOWSHIP SQUARE FOUNDATION: $409 → 6%HAMILTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $500 → 4%TREE OF LIFE: $2k → 4%CHILDREN'S SCIENCE CENTER OF VIRGINIA: $500 → 6%VA ACADEMY PATRIOT FUND: $1k → 4%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

NY
NV
PA
CO
VA
MD
TN
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$104k · 11 repeat orgs$22k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
18

Total granted

$104k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-9%
+0%

Still filing today

9%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
Human ServicesPublic Safety & DisasterRecreation & SportsYouth DevelopmentHealthHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • WA
    WILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS
    5× · 2017–2021 · $48k
  • HL
    HERES LIFE AFRICA
    4× · 2022–2025 · $24k
  • CF
    CENTER FOR ADVANCED HEALTH & WELLNESS
    4× · 2017–2020 · $8k

Funded once

  • CC
    CORNERSTONE CHAPEL
    one grant, 2020 · $8k
  • CC
    CAPITAL CHURCH
    one grant, 2019 · $2k
  • CC
    CAPITAL CHURCH (PASTOR AMOS)
    one grant, 2021 · $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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 35 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
3/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: $48,000 · OtherWILLIAM AND MARY SCHOOL OF BUSINESSHERES LIFE AFRICA: $24,000 · OtherHERES LIFE AFRICACENTER FOR ADVANCED HEALTH & WELLNESS: $8,050 · OtherCENTER FOR ADVANCED HEALTH & WELLNESSCORNERSTONE CHAPEL: $7,875 · OtherCORNERSTONE CHAPELTREE OF LIFE: $6,500 · OtherTREE OF LIFE+23 more: $26,442 · Other+23 moreCORPORATION OF HAVERFORD COLLEGE: $5,800 · EducationMOBILE HOPE ASSOCIATION: $3,500 · Youth DevelopmentHamilton Volunteer Fire Department: $500 · Public Safety & DisasterBIKE THE US FOR MS INC: $500 · HealthFellowship Square Foundation: $409 · Housing & Shelter3E RESTORATION INC: $250 · Human ServicesUSTAMid-Atlantic Foundation: $100 · Recreation & Sports
Other$120,867Education$5,800Youth Development$3,500Public Safety & Disaster$500Health$500Housing & Shelter$409Human Services$250Recreation & Sports$100

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 budgetCORPORATION OF HAVERFORD COLLEGE: $5,800 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMOBILE HOPE ASSOCIATION: $3,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHamilton Volunteer Fire Department: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBIKE THE US FOR MS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFellowship Square Foundation: $409 over 1y, 0.0% of budget3E RESTORATION INC: $250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUSTAMid-Atlantic Foundation: $100 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.

  • Who funds CORPORATION OF HAVERFORD COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds MOBILE HOPE ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Hamilton Volunteer Fire Department ↗
  • Who funds BIKE THE US FOR MS INC ↗
  • Who funds Fellowship Square Foundation ↗
  • Who funds 3E RESTORATION INC ↗
  • Who funds USTAMid-Atlantic Foundation ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.4× affinity7 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Fitzgerald Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Fitzgerald Foundation Inc. 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%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 35 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 Fitzgerald’s filings →

    More from the funding graph