· Private foundation
The Leeps Foundation Inc
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 $10k20 grants · $38k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $46k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HOOFBEATS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER INC | $45,800 |
| WINGS OF HOPE RANCH | $5,000 |
| HOPETREE FAMILY SERVICES | $2,500 |
| GLORY REINS RANCH | $2,500 |
| SHEPARD YOUTH RANCH | $2,500 |
| RISEN RIDGE MINISTRY | $2,500 |
| BIT OF HOPE RANCH INC | $2,500 |
| DARE TO DREAM THERAPEUTIC HORSEMANSHIP CENTER | $2,500 |
| SPUR N UP HOPE INC | $2,400 |
| HOPE REINS | $2,000 |
| ST FRANCIS SERVICE DOG FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| THE BARNS AT BLUE MOUNTAIN INC | $1,800 |
| SHINING HOPE FARMS | $1,500 |
| BRIGHT SIDE YOUTH RANCH | $1,500 |
| NEW DAY EQUINE THERAPY | $1,500 |
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 (FY18–25, $52k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 67% 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.
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 +22% since the first grant, against -14% for the ones you funded once.
41 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 2 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, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
- HTHOOFBEATS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER INC9× · 2017–2025 · $326k · revenue +16% · 38% of their budget
HOPE REINS7× · 2019–2025 · $15k · revenue +60%- BOBit of Hope Ranch Inc6× · 2020–2025 · $14k · revenue +22%
Funded once
- SFST FRANCIS OF ASSISI SERVICE DOG FOUNDATIONone grant, 2017 · $3k
- JOJOURNEY OF HOPE FOR AUTISMone grant, 2022 · $2k
- VSVIRGINIA SEARCH AND RESCUE DOG ASSOCIATION INCone grant, 2022 · $2k
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.
Enable mentally and/or physically challenged youth or adults in a therapeutic horseback riding program.
Rescue rehabilitation recovery of equine mammals
Interaction between horses and people for therapy
To improve the minds, bodies and spirits of children and adults with special needs through the benefits of therapeutic riding and equine assisted activities.
To contribute to the emotional, physical and psychological betterment of mankind by integrating equine assisted psychotherapy, equine assisted learning and related activities with art and other non-traditional therapies to create a…
Provides therapeutic sessions utilizing horses our program offers therapeutic riding and experiential therapy and learning via Equine Assisted Psychotherapy and other activities, providing the opportunity to improve mental health and…
Our mission is to help every individual reach their full potential; horses and humans alike. We have three great programs that come together in harmony to accomplish that.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hoofbeats Therapeutic Riding Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Trails of Purpose. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 17 years old; the field is 17. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
28 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. 28 of the 49 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 HOOFBEATS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Wings of Hope Ranch Inc ↗
- Who funds HOPE REINS ↗
- Who funds Bit of Hope Ranch Inc ↗
- Who funds BROOK HILL RETIREMENT CENTER FOR HORSES INC ↗
- Who funds Bright Side Youth Ranch Inc ↗
- Who funds GLORY REINS INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds SPUR N UP HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds Shining Hope Farms ↗
- Who funds TRAILS OF PURPOSE ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA BAPTIST CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Equi-Kids Therapeutic Riding Program ↗
- Who funds HEALING STRIDES OF VIRGINIA ↗
- Who funds New Freedom Farm Inc ↗
- Who funds Heartland Horse Heroes Inc ↗
- Who funds Ride With Pride Inc ↗
- Who funds BRIDLE PATHS ↗
- Who funds DREAM CATCHERS ↗
- Who funds NEW DAY EQUINE THERAPY ↗
- Who funds BLUE RIDGE CENTER FOR THERAPEUTICHORSEMANSHIP ↗
- Who funds CLOVERLEAF EQUINE CENTER ↗
- Who funds BARNS AT BLUE MOUNTAIN INC ↗
- Who funds SIMPLE CHANGES INC ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER ↗
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: Paul H Pusey Foundation · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · Christopher Reeve Foundation · Virginia Equine Alliance · Cartledge Charitable Foundation Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust
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 Leeps Foundation Inc 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.