Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Pioneer Fund

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.

$32k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$18k
Largest
01What you fund
0194% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Recreation & Sports$158kInternational$58kEducation$19kReligion$8kCommunity Improvement$5kYouth Development$5kHuman Services$3kArts & Culture$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $4k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$23k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BELIZE EDUCATION PROJECT$18,200
Individual grant recipient$10,000
UCLA FOUNDATION$2,500
BASICS TEAM FOUNDATION$1,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–23, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 26% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%RED ROAD: $5k → 10%SAFEHOUSE DENVER: $3k → 12%THE RED ROAD INC: $2k → 4%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$186k · 6 repeat orgs$79k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
10

Total granted

$186k
$69k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+8%

Still filing today

83%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationRecreation & SportsReligionOther

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

  • HS
    HELMAR SKATING FUND
    2× · 2022–2024 · $135k · revenue -20% · 100% of their budget
  • BE
    BELIZE EDUCATION PROJECT
    3× · 2023–2025 · $22k · revenue 0%
  • GE
    GENTRYS EDUCATION CENTER AT THE STORE FRONT INC
    3× · 2020–2023 · $11k · revenue +77%

Funded once

  • BE
    BELIZE EDUCATIONAL PROJECT
    one grant, 2020 · $36k
  • PS
    PHILADELPHIA SKATING CLUB
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • PS
    PROFESSIONAL SKATERS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +4%

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

04Your field

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.

1
Pikes Peak Athletic Foundation
Recreation & Sports
2
T2 Foundation

To provide funds to cover expenses and subsidize costs of training & development for qualified athletes participating in Olympic sports, including Alpine, cross-country, freestyle, or freeskiing disciplines.

3
Silverfork Skimo Foundation

None

Recreation & Sports
4
The Elway Foundation
5
Athletes of Promise Foundation
Youth Development
6
Evans Scholars Foundation - Colorado

Educational

Education
7
Be You

Underserved student ages 4-24 coaching, mentoring and life skills

8
Uncommon Individual Foundation
9
Kris Perani Hockey Foundation

Community sponsor for youth athletics

Human Services
10
Doing Good Works Foundation

Tutoring at risk youth

Community Improvement
11
Sandra Gal Foundation Inc

To provide the best support for a young athlete to be able to pursue their dreams as well as be a balanced, confident and happy individual.

Youth Development
12
Scotty Lapp Foundation

Charity volunteer organization focused on providing access to skiing, snowboarding and skateboarding for underserved youth to reach their full potential. We are building community skateparks to provide recreational access and we provide…

Youth Development

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Gentrys Education Center At the Store Front Inc and the most unlike its peers is Helmar Skating Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

11 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 18 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

HELMAR SKATING FUND — $135,000 · OtherHELMAR SKATING FUNDBELIZE EDUCATIONAL PROJECT — $36,000 · OtherBELIZE EDUCATIONAL PROJECTIndividual grant recipient — $10,000 · OtherPHILADELPHIA SKATING CLUB — $10,000 · Other+5 more — $21,500 · Other+5 moreBELIZE EDUCATION PROJECT — $22,200 · EducationBELIZE EDUCATION PR…GENTRYS EDUCATION CENTER AT THE STORE FRONT INC — $11,000 · EducationGENTRYS EDUCATION C…UCLA FOUNDATION — $7,500 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATIONBASICS Team Foundation Inc — $5,000 · EducationBASICS Team Foundat…The Red Road Inc — $7,000 · Human ServicesSAFEHOUSE DENVER INC — $2,500 · Human ServicesPORTERS CALL — $2,000 · Human ServicesSportswomen of Colorado Inc — $1,500 · Recreation & SportsOPERATION ANDREW GROUP INC — $1,000 · Religion
Other$212,500Education$45,700Human Services$11,500Recreation & Sports$1,500Religion$1,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetHELMAR SKATING FUND — $135,000 over 2y, 100% of budgetBELIZE EDUCATION PROJECT — $22,200 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetGENTRYS EDUCATION CENTER AT THE STORE FRONT INC — $11,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION — $7,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetThe Red Road Inc — $7,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetPROFESSIONAL SKATERS FOUNDATION — $5,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetBASICS Team Foundation Inc — $5,000 over 5y, 6.9% of budgetSAFEHOUSE DENVER INC — $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPORTERS CALL — $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSportswomen of Colorado Inc — $1,500 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetOPERATION ANDREW GROUP INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee IncTN12.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee Inc · 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 Pioneer Fund 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%your 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
    2report 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, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 18 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph