· Private foundation
The Hn (Jay) Hoffman III 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| REMOTE AREA MEDICAL | $13,100 |
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 (FY17–18, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 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.
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 9% of The Hn (Jay) Hoffman III Foundation’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. Read by recipient address, 35% of the giving stays in VA; read by stated purpose it is 44% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 +81% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 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, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
- TCThe Chris Lantos Foundation2× · 2017–2018 · $4k · revenue +5%
- AIALIVE Inc2× · 2017–2018 · $4k · revenue +81%
- SBSpecial Books by Special Kids Inc2× · 2017–2018 · $4k · revenue +221%
Funded once
HOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INCone grant, 2023 · $11k · revenue +19%- IHINOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -31%
- FFFURRY FRIENDSone grant, 2022 · $6k
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.
Donor Alliance saves and heals lives through organ and tissue donation. Donor Alliance is one of 55 Federally designated, non-profit organ procurement organizations serving Colorado and most of Wyoming. Additionally, it is a member of the…
Assisted Living and Nursing Care
Support organization
Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…
Retirement housing
DC Greens advances health equity by building a just and resilient food system.
We are making maryland healthier by connecting residents to insurance and care, educating the community about healthier living, and advocating a more equitable health care system.
Management services for related 501(c)(3) organizations.
To create an equitable and just community through high quality affordable housing and transformative resident services. We envision a community where an affordable home is available to everyone.
Hero Dogs improves the quality of life of our nations heroes and enhances the services of community organizations by placing assistance dogs with customized training & lifetime support.
Amplify the work of our community by bringing people and resources together.
California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Homes for Our Troops Inc and the most unlike its peers is Special Books by Special Kids Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 18 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 REMOTE AREA MEDICAL ↗
- Who funds HOMES FOR OUR TROOPS INC ↗
- Who funds INOVA HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BIG DOG RANCH RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds CANCER ALLIANCE OF HELP AND HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHESAPEAKE BAY TRUST ↗
- Who funds The Chris Lantos Foundation ↗
- Who funds ALIVE Inc ↗
- Who funds Special Books by Special Kids Inc ↗
- Who funds Volunteer Alexandria ↗
- Who funds New Hope Housing Inc ↗
- Who funds Move2Learn ↗
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: Act for Alexandria · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · 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 Hn (Jay) Hoffman III 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Chesapeake Bay Trust — 100% of income from government
- Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc — 2% of income from government
- Big Dog Ranch Rescue Inc — 0% 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.