Skip to content
The Lawrence W Inlow Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Lawrence W Inlow Foundation

Its FY2020 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$88k
Granted FY2020
15
Grants FY2020
6
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2020 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$6,423
Median grant
6
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PROJECT HOPE$6,424
SECOND HELPINGS$6,423
PEYTON MANNING CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL$6,423
LAF- LEARNING AND FAMILIES$6,423
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND$6,423
NO KID HUNGRY$6,423
Individual grant recipient$6,423
PREGNANCY SOLUTIONS$6,423
GLEANERS FOOD BANK$6,423
WHEELER MISSION$6,423
SUBURBAN NORTH CLUB$6,423
CAROL M BALDWIN BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC$6,423
THE LOST ARE FOUND$6,423
WHEELER MISSION$3,000
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$1,000
02The need
02

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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 59% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PREGNANCY SOLUTIONS: $6k → 9%WHEELER MISSION: $6k → 16%WHEELER MISSION: $3k → 16%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.
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 field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Second Harvest Heartland

Second harvest heartland's mission is to end hunger together. in partnership with more than 1,000 food shelves and hunger-relief programs in minnesota and western wisconsin, we provided 145 million meals to neighbors last year.

Food & Nutrition
2
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
3
Second Harvest of Silicon Valley

To realize our vision of a hunger free community we will provide more food, healthy food and better access to food. we will leverage our own resources and also work with partners in the community.

Food & Nutrition
4
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc

Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…

Health
5
Second Harvest Foodbank of Southern Wi

Second harvest foodbank exists to end hunger in southwestern wisconsin.

Food & Nutrition
6
The Global FoodBanking Network

To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.

International
7
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
8
Oceana Inc

To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.

Environment
9
Hunger Solutions New York Inc

We strive to maximize participation in, and support for, federally funded nutrition assistance programs including supplemental nutrition assistance program (snap), the school breakfast program and national school lunch program, the summer…

Food & Nutrition
10
Spoonfuls

Spoonfuls is an organization that facilitates the recovery and distribution of healthy, perishable food that would otherwise be discarded. spoonfuls works efficiently to deliver this food directly to the community organizations and…

Food & Nutrition
11
Nourishing Hope

Nourishing hope provides food, mental health support, and social services to help all our neighbors thrive.

—
12
Share My Meals Inc

Originating in mercer county in 2020 with the mission of tackling both food insecurity and food waste, share my meals has since expanded across the state of new jersey. more than 994,000 new jersey residents are food-secure while over 1.9…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Gleaners Food Bank of Indiana Inc; the most unlike its peers is Suburban North Club Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

9 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. 9 of the 14 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PROJECT H O P E INC: $6,424 · OtherPROJECT H O P E INCTHE LOST ARE FOUND: $6,423 · OtherTHE LOST ARE FOUNDGLEANERS FOOD BANK OF INDIANA INC: $6,423 · OtherGLEANERS FOOD BANK OF INDIANA INCLAF- LEARNING AND FAMILIES: $6,423 · OtherLAF- LEARNING AND FAMILIESSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $6,423 · OtherSHARE OUR STRENGTHIndividual grant recipient: $6,423 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPEYTON MANNING CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $6,423 · OtherPEYTON MANNING CHILDREN'S HOSPITALWHEELER MISSION MINISTRIES INC: $9,423 · Human ServicesWHEELER MISSION MINI…PREGNANCY SOLUTIONS INC: $6,423 · Human ServicesPREGNANCY SOLUTIONS …CAROL M BALDWIN BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC: $6,423 · HealthCAROL M BALDWIN B…Suburban North Club Corporation: $6,423 · HealthSuburban North Cl…American Heart Association Inc: $1,000 · HealthAmerican Heart As…SECOND HELPINGS INC: $6,423 · Food & NutritionENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $6,423 · Environment
Other$44,962Human Services$15,846Health$13,846Food & Nutrition$6,423Environment$6,423

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 budgetWHEELER MISSION MINISTRIES INC: $9,423 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAROL M BALDWIN BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC: $6,423 over 1y, 10% of budgetGLEANERS FOOD BANK OF INDIANA INC: $6,423 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSECOND HELPINGS INC: $6,423 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSuburban North Club Corporation: $6,423 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $6,423 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPREGNANCY SOLUTIONS INC: $6,423 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $6,423 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $1,000 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Lawrence W Inlow Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Lawrence W Inlow Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–5%
    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 14 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Lawrence W Inlow’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home