· Private foundation
The Patricia Florence Miller Trust
Its FY2024 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 FY2020–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Iowa Farm Sanctuary | $9,970 |
| Speak Up for Horses | $7,300 |
| Animals Angels | $7,300 |
| Bideawee | $7,300 |
| Individual grant recipient | $7,300 |
| Guardians of Rescue | $7,300 |
| Save-a-Pet Animal Rescue | $7,300 |
| Feeding Pets of the Homeless | $6,800 |
| Individual grant recipient | $6,800 |
| Equine Advocates | $6,800 |
| PAWS & More Animal Shelter | $6,800 |
| Mercy for Animals | $6,800 |
| Friends of Animals | $6,800 |
| Equine Voices Rescue & Sanctuary | $6,800 |
| Animal Equality | $6,800 |
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 (FY20–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 77% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +37% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
55 repeat relationships — 51 still active in FY2023, 4 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $42k 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
- LCLast Chance for Animals4× · 2020–2023 · $18k · revenue +2%
- FOFRIENDS OF ANIMALS INC4× · 2020–2023 · $16k · revenue +4%
- ACAlley Cat Allies Inc4× · 2020–2023 · $16k · revenue +104%
Funded once
- HHHEARTLAND HUMANE SOCIETY LTDgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $101k · revenue +167% · 37% of their budget
- NBNEW BEGINNINGS PET RESCUE OF THE QUone grant, 2021 · $4k
- AAAnimals' Angels Incorporatedgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $4k · revenue +53%
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.
Animal Welfare
At Hope for China Dogs, we are committed to combating the cruel and inhumane practice of the dog meat trade in China. We believe that every dog deserves to live a life free from pain and suffering, and we are dedicated to rescuing and…
To rescue at risk k-9s from asia.
To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
Animal Welfare
The Animal Legal Defense Fund Cruelty Prevention Unit's primary mission is to prevent cruelty to animals.
Idaho Animal Rescue Network is a 501(c)(3) non-profit based in Idaho that works in Idaho and Eastern Washington to educate, advocate, and network with other rescues and law enforcement in Idaho regarding animal cruelty and neglect. We are…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Defenders of Animal Rights Inc and the most unlike its peers is Keepers of the Wild. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
57 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. 57 of the 103 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 HEARTLAND HUMANE SOCIETY LTD ↗
- Who funds Last Chance for Animals ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds Alley Cat Allies Inc ↗
- Who funds Animal Place ↗
- Who funds THE WHITE COAT WASTE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds IOWA FARM SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds HEARTS UNITED FOR ANIMALS ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ANTI-VIVISECTION SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN ANTI-VIVISECTION SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Front Range Equine Rescue ↗
- Who funds SAVE A PET ANIMAL RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds THE HUMANE LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds BIDEAWEE INC ↗
- Who funds MERCY FOR ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds CASTLETON RANCH HORSE RESCUE INC ↗
- Who funds EQUINE ADVOCATES INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds GENTLE GIANTS DRAFT HORSE RESCUE SOCIETY LTD ↗
- Who funds Animal Rescue Corps Inc ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HORSES INC ↗
- Who funds THE MARY C SCHANZ FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD ANIMAL PROTECTION ↗
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: PC Fund for Animals Charitable Tr · Bradford Family Foundation · The Susan and Ford Schumann Foundation · Paula Knickerbocker Foundation Inc · Surendra and Karen Gupta Arc Foundation · Seckinger Foundation Corporation · The Gerald B Shreiber Foundation · John R Oltman Charitable Foundation · Joyce a Ward Foundation · Duncans and Tuquis Legacy Organization Dba Datlo · Butchkie Foundation Inc · Susan & Jerome Ettelson Fund
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 Patricia Florence Miller 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.