Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Hop & Mae Adams 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.

$579k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$226k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20212025.

Community Improvement$1.8MHuman Services$340kFood & Nutrition$254kYouth Development$87kEducation$37kEmployment$20kArts & Culture$18k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $55k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $524k
$61,650
Median grant
2
States reached
$49M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Adams Northgate Inc$225,927
Adams Hub Inc$160,927
Greenhouse Project$75,584
Xquisite LLC$61,650
St Teresa of Avila Catholic School$25,000
Boys and Girls Club of Western Nevada$15,000
Carson City Chamber of Commerce$15,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY23–24, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Xquisite LLC: $60k → 13%Xquisite LLC: $60k → 13%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 64% of The Hop & Mae Adams 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, 66% of the giving stays in ID; read by stated purpose it is 3% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

The Hop & Mae Adams Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.5M · 13 repeat orgs$81k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +27% since the first grant, against -21% for the ones you funded once.

13 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
4

Total granted

$2.5M
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
-21%

Still filing today

62%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $62k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’21’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationEnvironmentArts & CultureOther

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

  • AN
    Adams Northgate Inc
    3× · 2023–2025 · $403k · revenue ×21 · 85% of their budget
  • TG
    THE GREENHOUSE PROJECT
    5× · 2021–2025 · $243k · revenue +27%
  • BA
    Boys and Girls Clubs of Western Nevada
    3× · 2022–2025 · $70k · revenue +387%

Funded once

  • SO
    State of Nevada Department of Education
    one grant, 2023 · $14k
  • CC
    Carson City Culture & Tourism Authority DBA Visit Carson City
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
  • CC
    CARSON CITY SCHOOLS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue -21%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Healthy Nevada
Health
2
Nevada Agricultural Foundation
Food & Nutrition
3
Our Nevada Judges Inc
Education
4
Nevada Gold Mines Heritage Fund
Philanthropy
5
Nevada Peer Support Network Inc
Health
6
Cozad Development Corporation

Foster Business Development in Cozad, NE

7
Sage Valley Inc
Environment
8
The Nevada Bighorns Foundation
Education
9
Nevada Veterans Memorial Plaza

To honor and preserve the legacy of our fallen brothers and sisters who have given their life in service to our country since nevada became a state in 1864

Arts & Culture
10
Carson Chamber of Commerce

Economic Development

11
Association of Chinese-American Engineers and Scientists of New Mexico
Science & Tech
12
Northeastern Nevada Historical Soci

Northeastern nevada historcial society is dedicated to the preservation of the hertitage, culture, and natural history of northeastern nevada. our ongoing goals are to establish a western art center and nourish the western culture that…

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys and Girls Clubs of Western Nevada and the most unlike its peers is Adams Northgate Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Adams Hub Inc — $1,192,008 · Community ImprovementAdams Hub IncAdams Northgate Inc — $402,580 · Community ImprovementAdams Northgate IncNORTHERN NEVADA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — $170,000 · Community ImprovementNORTHERN NEVADA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITYNEVADA STATE EB-5 REGIONAL CENTER INC — $158,737 · OtherNEVADA STATE EB-5…Boys and Girls Clubs of Western Nevada — $70,000 · OtherBoys and Girls Cl…Xquisite LLC — $61,650 · OtherXquisite LLCSt Teresa of Avila Catholic School — $35,000 · OtherSt Teresa of Avil…CARSON CITY AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $19,687 · OtherState of Nevada Department of Education — $13,550 · Other+4 more — $18,309 · OtherTHE GREENHOUSE PROJECT — $243,370 · EnvironmentTHE GREENH…XQUISITE — $120,000 · Human ServicesBASQUE MUSEUM & CULTURAL CENTER INC — $15,000 · Arts & CultureCARSON CITY SCHOOLS FOUNDATION — $2,000 · Education
Community Improvement$1,764,588Other$396,933Environment$243,370Human Services$120,000Arts & Culture$15,000Education$2,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetAdams Northgate Inc — $402,580 over 3y, 85% of budgetTHE GREENHOUSE PROJECT — $243,370 over 5y, 24% of budgetNORTHERN NEVADA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — $170,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetNEVADA STATE EB-5 REGIONAL CENTER INC — $158,737 over 3y, 100% of budgetXQUISITE — $120,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetBoys and Girls Clubs of Western Nevada — $70,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetCARSON CITY AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE — $20,000 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetBASQUE MUSEUM & CULTURAL CENTER INC — $15,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetCARSON CITY SCHOOLS FOUNDATION — $2,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budget
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 Adams Hub Inc
  • Who funds Adams Northgate Inc
  • Who funds THE GREENHOUSE PROJECT
  • Who funds NORTHERN NEVADA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
  • Who funds NEVADA STATE EB-5 REGIONAL CENTER INC
  • Who funds XQUISITE
  • Who funds Boys and Girls Clubs of Western Nevada
  • Who funds CARSON CITY AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
  • Who funds BASQUE MUSEUM & CULTURAL CENTER INC
  • Who funds CARSON CITY SCHOOLS FOUNDATION

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Hop & Mae Adams 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%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 · 0–75%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Hop & Mae Adams Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Hop & Mae Adams Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 18 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph