Skip to content
The Oak Hill Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

The Oak Hill Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$5.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
133
Grants FY2025still arriving
19
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$11MHealth$5.5MCivil Rights$2.0MEducation$1.5MHousing & Shelter$1.1MFood & Nutrition$1.0MPhilanthropy$743kHuman Services$674kOther$0
02FY2025 · 133 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k34 grants · $88k
  • $10k–50k49 grants · $1.2M
  • $50k–250k50 grants · $4.6M
$30,000
Median grant
19
States reached
$90M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ALBEMARLE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM$200,000
ALBEMARLE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM$200,000
BOOK TRUST$200,000
BOOK TRUST$200,000
THE AMERICAN CHESTNUT FOUNDATION$150,000
PIEDMONT HOUSING ALLIANCE$150,000
PIEDMONT HOUSING ALLIANCE$150,000
HEALTHY REEFS FOR HEALTHY PEOPLE$140,000
WHOLE WOMEN'S HEALTH$125,000
NEW RIVER ABORTION ACCESS FUND$100,000
BLUE RIDGE ABORTION FUND$100,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS$100,000
DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION$100,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS$100,000
DENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION$100,000
02The need
03

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 (FY19–25, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 76% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%A STEP AHEAD FOUNDATION INC: $100k → 14%A STEP AHEAD FOUNDATION TRI-CITIES: $110k → 14%PRO-CHOICE NORTH CAROLINA FOUNDATION: $75k → 11%THE INGA FOUNDATION: $25k → 13%ROCKFISH VALLEY COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $30k → 13%WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $75k → 16%A STEP AHEAD FOUNDATION TRI-CITIES: $75k → 14%NARAL PRO-CHOICE NORTH CAROLINA FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%THE INGA FOUNDATION: $25k → 13%POSSIBILITY LABS: $25k → 10%WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $75k → 16%NARAL PRO-CHOICE NORTH CAROLINA FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%THE INGA FOUNDATION: $25k → 13%NEW OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL FOR WOMEN: $10k → 16%WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $50k → 16%MILLENNIUM GROUP: $40k → 13%NEW OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL FOR WOMEN: $10k → 16%WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $45k → 16%NEW OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL FOR WOMEN: $5k → 16%WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $45k → 16%HOPE CENTER INC: $30k → 12%NEW OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL FOR WOMEN INC: $5k → 16%HOPE CENTER INC: $30k → 12%NEW OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL FOR WOMEN: $5k → 16%NEW OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL FOR WOMEN INC: $5k → 16%THE HAVEN AT FIRST & MARKET: $30k → 8%THE HAVEN AT FIRST & MARKET: $15k → 8%HAVEN AT FIRST & MARKET INC: $15k → 8%THE HAVEN AT FIRST & MARKET: $15k → 8%SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMERGENCY: $5k → 8%SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMERGENCY: $5k → 8%SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMERGENCY: $5k → 8%SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMERGENCY: $5k → 8%SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMERGENCY: $5k → 8%SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMERGENCY: $5k → 8%SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMERGENCY: $5k → 8%SERVICE DOGS OF VIRGINIA: $3k → 8%SERVICE DOGS OF VIRGINIA INC: $3k → 8%SERVICE DOGS OF VIRGINIA INC: $3k → 8%SERVICE DOGS OF VIRGINIA INC: $3k → 8%SERVICE DOGS OF VIRGINIA INC: $3k → 8%JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING INC: $40k → 8%JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING: $40k → 8%JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING INC: $40k → 8%GEORGIA'S FRIENDS: $5k → 8%JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING INC: $40k → 8%JEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING: $30k → 8%GEORGIAS FRIENDS: $5k → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
MT
MN
WI
NY
MA
PA
NJ
RI
CA
CO
NE
KY
WV
VA
MD
AZ
NM
TN
NC
SC
DC
AL
GA
TX
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 14% of The Oak Hill Fund’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 38% of the giving stays in VA; by stated purpose, 44%.

The Oak Hill Fundlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 8.1% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$26M · 174 repeat orgs$4.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +40% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

174 repeat relationships: 96 still active in FY2025, 78 since wound down; 25 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

174
94

Total granted

$26M
$3.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+15%

Still filing today

90%
69%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentHealthEducationHuman ServicesCivil RightsAnimalsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • BT
    BOOK TRUST
    4× · 2021–2025 · $900k · revenue +43%
  • THE AMERICAN CHESTNUT FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2025 · $600k · revenue +40%
  • VL
    VIRGINIA LEAGUE FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD INCORPORATED
    4× · 2020–2024 · $575k · revenue +56%

Funded once

  • MR
    MESOAMERICAN REEF FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $160k
  • TJ
    THOMAS JEFFERSON SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
    one grant, 2019 · $129k
  • NM
    NEW MORNING
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue -7%
How this is measured

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

04Its 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
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
2
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
3
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
4
Virginia Environmental Endowment

The endowment's mission is to improve the quality of the environment by using its capital, expertise, and resources to fund projects and programs that encourage all sectors to work together to prevent pollution, improve water quality,…

Environment
5
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
6
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
7
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
8
Terraset

Terraset uses philanthropic capital to purchase permanent, high-quality carbon removal. we pool donations from individuals, foundations, family offices, and donor advised funds, and make strategic purchases of high-quality carbon removal…

Environment
9
United States Endowment for Forestry

The endowment works collaboratively with partners in the public and private sectors to advance systemic, transformative, and sustainable change for the health and vitality of the nation's working forests and forest reliant communities.

Environment
10
The Breakthrough Institute

The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.

Environment
11
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
12
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Potomac Conservancy Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ndponics. 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

245 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 245 of the 298 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.

10
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
71
Early backer (in before they grew)
243/245
Grantees still filing
167/245
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE AMERICAN CHESTNUT FOUNDATION: $600,000 · EnvironmentTHE AMERICAN CHESTNUT FOUNDATIONLOCAL ENERGY ALLIANCE PROGRAM INC: $489,248 · EnvironmentSolar United Neighbors Inc: $435,000 · EnvironmentCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $430,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT: $400,000 · EnvironmentVIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $395,000 · EnvironmentJAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION: $375,000 · Environment+53 more: $7,764,816 · Environment+53 moreIndividual grant recipient: $392,500 · OtherWOMENS EMERGENCY NETWORK INC: $345,000 · OtherSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $325,000 · OtherVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC: $326,150 · OtherSTATES NEWSROOM: $316,000 · Other+79 more: $7,227,158 · Other+79 moreVIRGINIA LEAGUE FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD INCORPORATED: $575,000 · HealthVIRGINIA LEAGU…ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $480,000 · HealthROCKY MOUNTAIN…PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTHEAST INC: $400,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENT…Women's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project: $380,000 · HealthWomen's Reprod…BLUE RIDGE ABORTION FUND INC: $350,263 · HealthBLUE RIDGE ABO…WHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE: $275,575 · HealthWHOLE WOMAN'S …National Women's Health Network: $225,000 · HealthNational Women…PLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTH ATLANTIC INC: $200,200 · Health+13 more: $1,080,820 · Health+13 moreBOOK TRUST: $900,000 · EducationTHE FAISON CENTER INC: $750,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $90,000 · EducationFoxcroft School: $70,000 · Education+5 more: $239,943 · EducationALBEMARLE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM INC: $800,000 · Housing & ShelterPIEDMONT HOUSING ALLIANCE: $518,400 · Housing & ShelterPIEDMONT COMMUNITY LAND TRUST: $170,000 · Housing & ShelterJOURNEY HOME INC: $92,785 · Housing & Shelter+2 more: $90,000 · Housing & ShelterWOMENS RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $290,300 · Human ServicesJEFFERSON AREA BOARD FOR AGING INC: $190,000 · Human ServicesA STEP AHEAD FOUNDATION TRI-CITIES: $185,000 · Human ServicesPRO-CHOICE NC FOUNDATION: $175,000 · Human ServicesDC ABORTION FUND: $160,000 · Human ServicesA STEP AHEAD FOUNDATION INC: $100,000 · Human ServicesTHE HAVEN AT FIRST AND MARKET INC: $75,000 · Human ServicesINGA FOUNDATION: $75,000 · Human ServicesTHURMAN BRISBEN HOMELESS SHELTER INC: $75,000 · Human ServicesHope Center Inc: $60,000 · Human Services+6 more: $200,000 · Human ServicesDENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $500,000 · PhilanthropyHOPEWELL FUND: $500,000 · PhilanthropyNEW MORNING: $100,000 · PhilanthropyINTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $90,000 · Philanthropy
Environment$10,889,064Other$8,931,808Health$3,966,858Education$2,049,943Housing & Shelter$1,671,185Human Services$1,585,300Philanthropy$1,190,000

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetBOOK TRUST: $900,000 over 4y, 7.4% of budgetALBEMARLE HOUSING IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM INC: $800,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetTHE FAISON CENTER INC: $750,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetTHE AMERICAN CHESTNUT FOUNDATION: $600,000 over 4y, 5.4% of budgetVIRGINIA LEAGUE FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD INCORPORATED: $575,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetPIEDMONT HOUSING ALLIANCE: $518,400 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetDENVER PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $500,000 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $500,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetLOCAL ENERGY ALLIANCE PROGRAM INC: $489,248 over 4y, 13% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC: $480,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSolar United Neighbors Inc: $435,000 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetCHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK INC: $430,000 over 5y, 4.4% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTHEAST INC: $400,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT: $400,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetVIRGINIA CONSERVATION NETWORK: $395,000 over 5y, 11% of budgetWomen's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project: $380,000 over 5y, 20% of budgetJAMES RIVER ASSOCIATION: $375,000 over 5y, 2.4% of budgetBLUE RIDGE ABORTION FUND INC: $350,263 over 4y, 18% of budgetAPPALACHIAN VOICES: $350,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetPotomac Riverkeeper Network: $345,000 over 4y, 5.9% of budgetWOMENS EMERGENCY NETWORK INC: $345,000 over 5y, 45% of budgetVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC: $326,150 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $325,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetBay Islands Conservation Association Inc: $325,000 over 4y, 81% of budgetSTATES NEWSROOM: $316,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetTHE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE: $315,000 over 5y, 2.0% of budgetRARE: $315,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetTHE LONGLEAF ALLIANCE INC: $291,250 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetWOMENS RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $290,300 over 5y, 5.4% of budgetWHOLE WOMAN'S HEALTH ALLIANCE: $275,575 over 4y, 3.8% of budgetCultivate Charlottesville: $260,000 over 4y, 7.4% of budgetMemphis Center For Reproductive Health Inc: $260,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $250,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNEW RIVER ABORTION ACCESS FUND: $240,000 over 3y, 78% of budgetBLUE RIDGE AREA FOOD BANK INC: $240,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc: $240,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBAY JOURNAL MEDIA INC: $240,000 over 5y, 4.4% of budgetCHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC: $240,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetSTEWARDS OF THE LOWER SUSQUEHANNA INC DBA LOWER SUSQUEHANNA RIVERKEEPER ASS: $235,000 over 5y, 24% of budgetNATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION: $230,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetNational Women's Health Network: $225,000 over 3y, 5.0% of budgetFRESH ENERGY: $225,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetUPSTATE FOREVER: $224,015 over 5y, 3.2% of budgetSouth Carolina Coastal Conservation League Inc: $220,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetCHESAPEAKE LEGAL ALLIANCE INC: $210,000 over 3y, 25% of budgetCENTER FOR PROGRESSIVE REFORM INC: $205,000 over 4y, 5.7% of budgetRIVANNA CONSERVATION ALLIANCE: $201,100 over 7y, 13% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD SOUTH ATLANTIC INC: $200,200 over 7y, 0.2% 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.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Charlottesville Area …The J & E Berkley Fou…Perry Foundation IncThe Genan FoundationCaplin FoundationThe Charles Fund IncUnited States Energy …Manning Family Founda…S&P Global Foundation…Oakwood Foundation Ch…Westwind FoundationSentara Health
Charlottesville Area Community FoundationVA111.6× affinity65 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Charlottesville Area Community Foundation · The J & E Berkley Foundation · Perry Foundation Inc · The Genan Foundation · Caplin Foundation · The Charles Fund Inc · United States Energy Foundation · Manning Family Foundation · S&P Global Foundation Fka the McGraw-Hill Research Foundation · Oakwood Foundation Charitable Trust · Westwind Foundation · Sentara Health

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Oak Hill Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Oak Hill Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 150%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Center for Watershed Protection Inc: 64% of income from government
  • Ridge to Reefs Inc: 33% of income from government
  • Chesapeake Conservancy Inc: 27% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • Clean Energy States Alliance Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc: 2% of income from government
  • The Marion Institute Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Clearwater Marine Aquarium Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Ceres Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Rethink Energy Florida Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
15get no government money at all
46report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 298 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Oak Hill’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