· Private foundation
The Hubert a and Gladys C Estabrook Charitable Trust
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 $10k3 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $80k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON SCHOOL OF LAW | $25,000 |
| THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY | $18,000 |
| CAPITAL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW | $15,000 |
| THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY | $12,000 |
| THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF CLEVELAND | $10,000 |
| THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY | $6,000 |
| CITY CLUB OF CLEVELAND | $5,000 |
| CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN BAR FOUNDATION | $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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of your 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.
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.
15 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 10 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, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- LALEGAL AID SOCIETY OF CLEVELAND8× · 2017–2025 · $80k · revenue +134%
- TOTHE OHIO CENTER FOR LAW RELATED EDUCATION4× · 2017–2020 · $40k · revenue +0%
- UOUniversity of Dayton2× · 2022–2023 · $40k · revenue +4%
Funded once
- TUTHE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue +3%
- CSCLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +4%
- LALaw and Leadership Institute LLCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +30%
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.
To promote the rule of law and the legal profession by supporting, empowering and celebrating our members and the community.
To promote professional excellence, foster justice, serve our members and educate the public.
The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…
The mission is to provide continuing legal education to the almuni association's members, dissmination of information to members of the legal profession, and provide a forum for the exchange of ideas and developments. in addition, the…
The columbus bar foundation is a 501(c)(3) organization and is classified as a 509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(a)(vi) public charity that, in partnership with the columbus bar association, is committed to promoting: access to justice by all…
The ohio state bar association (the "association") is an unincorporated voluntary non-profit organization. the association was formed to promote justice and advance the interests of the legal profession.
The mission of cleveland leadership center (the organization) is to build a continuum of civic leaders committed to our community's excellence by serving as a catalyst for civic engagement. the organization achieves its mission by…
The mission of the center for legal inclusiveness (cli) is to advance diversity in the legal profession by actively educating and supporting private and public sector legal organizations in their individual campaigns to create cultures of…
Promoting justice and changing lives through the law with the desire to serve the legal profession, the justice system and the Greater Cincinnati community. The Cincinnati Bar Foundation concentrates grant-making efforts in the following…
The mission of Ohio Crime Victim Justice Center (OCVJC) is to ensure that the constitutional and statutory rights of Ohio crime victims are protected and enforced in state and federal jurisdictions in all 88 Ohio counties. To fulfill this…
Advance fairness, opportunity, and inclusion in the legal profession.
The council was formed as a vehicle for collective consultation and as a conduit for the exchange of ideas on court administration, rules and methods of procedure, and the organization and operation of state courts of appeal. the council…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Ohio Center for Law Related Education and the most unlike its peers is Christian Trial Lawyers Association. 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 21 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 THE DAYTON BAR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN BAR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF CLEVELAND ↗
- Who funds THE OHIO CENTER FOR LAW RELATED EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds University of Dayton ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PRO BONO PARTNERSHIP OF OHIO ↗
- Who funds UNITED REHABILITATION SERVICES OF GREATER DAYTON ↗
- Who funds CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Law and Leadership Institute LLC ↗
- Who funds THE CITY CLUB OF CLEVELAND ↗
- Who funds Veterans Consortium Pro Bono Program ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN TRIAL LAWYERS ASSOCIATION ↗
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: Ohio State Bar Foundation · The Dayton Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Hubert a and Gladys C Estabrook Charitable Trust 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.