· Private foundation
The Gordon J Hammersley Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k8 grants · $35k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $125k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LEELANAU CONSERVANCY | $30,000 |
| TRAVERSE CITY CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL | $15,000 |
| MOTHER HUBBARD'S CUPBOARD | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $10,000 |
| HARRY CHAPIN FOOD BANK | $10,000 |
| KALAMAZOO LOAVES AND FISHES | $10,000 |
| LENAWEE COUNTY MISSION NEIGHBORS OF HOPE | $10,000 |
| WCMU PUBLIC MEDIA | $10,000 |
| THE ARCHANGEL ANCIENT TREE ARCHIVE | $10,000 |
| TART TRAILS | $5,000 |
| YMCA STORER CAMPS | $5,000 |
| MICHIGAN CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK | $5,000 |
| A4TE EDUCATION FUND | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $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.
Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those 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.
26 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $36k 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
- AAARCHANGEL ANCIENT TREE ARCHIVE4× · 2018–2025 · $43k · revenue +172%
- YMYoung Men's Christian Association of Greater Toledo7× · 2017–2025 · $40k · revenue +44%
- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC4× · 2017–2021 · $30k · revenue +10%
Funded once
- PHPURPLE HEART PROJECTgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $30k · revenue +51%
- LTLELAND TOWNSHIP PUBLIC LIBRARYone grant, 2024 · $30k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2024 · $15k
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 union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…
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…
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
The mission of the corporation shall be to work with partners to protect and restore native ecosystems and watersheds, to improve the quality and quantity of freshwater resources to perpetuate hawaiian cultural resources and practices, to…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
Informing and educating the public and decision makers about environmental issues.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is World Vision Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Museum of Natural History. 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 36 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 11% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 64 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 ARCHANGEL ANCIENT TREE ARCHIVE ↗
- Who funds LEELANAU CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Young Men's Christian Association of Greater Toledo ↗
- Who funds PURPLE HEART PROJECT ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds MOTHER HUBBARDS CUPBOARD INC ↗
- Who funds TRAVERSE AREA RECREATION & TRANSPORTATION TRAILS INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds KALAMAZOO LOAVES & FISHES INC ↗
- Who funds Michigan Climate Action Network ↗
- Who funds SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF NEW ENGL ↗
- Who funds CHERRY STREET MISSION MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
- Who funds SUNRISE MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds RAZOM INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY KITCHEN OF MONROE COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds LENAWEE COUNTY MISSION ↗
- Who funds OLD STURBRIDGE INC ↗
- Who funds INLAND SEAS EDUCATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds HARRY CHAPIN FOOD BANK OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA 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: Consumers Energy Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Charities Aid Foundation America · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good
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 Gordon J Hammersley 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Old Sturbridge Inc — 4% of income from government
- Society for the Preservation of New Engl — 2% 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.