· Private foundation
The Richard J Fitton Family Fdn
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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
79% of The Richard J Fitton Family Fdn’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Hamilton Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
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
- $10k–50k2 grants · $55k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HAMILTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $200,356 |
| YMCA | $30,000 |
| FORT HAMILTON HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
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 (FY19–20, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% 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 +37% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- CFCOMMUNITY FIRST SOLUTIONS3× · 2017–2020 · $595k · revenue +10%
- THTHE HAMILTON PARKS CONSERVANCY5× · 2017–2022 · $110k · revenue +107%
- GMGREAT MIAMI VALLEY YMCA2× · 2019–2020 · $75k · revenue +59%
Funded once
- JNJOE NUXHALL FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $100k
- RTROSS TOWNSHIP FIRE DEPTone grant, 2020 · $40k
- TFTHE FORT HAMILTON HOSPITALone grant, 2022 · $40k · revenue +8%
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.
To solicit, invest, and disburse funds as grants and scholarships for the educational, charitable, artistic, social and civic benefit of the citizens in the surrounding community.
To improve the health of central pennsylvania's residents by delivering high quality, respectful and patient-centered health and related social servies that promote access, treatment, education, and prevention regardless of health,…
To mobilize people, ideas and investment to make this a community where every individual has equitable opportunity to reach their full potential - no matter place, race or identity. (continued on schedule o)
To provide quality, culturally sensitive and accessible primary health care services focusing on the medically underserved, underinsured, and uninsured residing in northern hamilton county and surrounding areas.
Promoting the mental health and general welfare of persons in the community by supporting financially and otherwise conducting activities or programs for the benefit of hamilton center, inc., the "supported organizaton", an indiana…
Improve community apprearance through purchasing vacant properties
Through advocacy, partnerships, and high-quality programs, our dedicated team is breaking down barriers to equity and opportunity, while building self-sufficiency across generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fort Hamilton Hospital Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Fairfield Community Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
10 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. 10 of the 22 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 HAMILTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FIRST SOLUTIONS ↗
- Who funds FITTON CENTER FOR CREATIVE ARTS ↗
- Who funds THE HAMILTON PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds FAIRFIELD COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GREAT MIAMI VALLEY YMCA ↗
- Who funds INSPIRATION STUDIOS ↗
- Who funds FORT HAMILTON HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE FORT HAMILTON HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL ADOPTION FOUNDATION ↗
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: Molyneaux Foundation 1045000246 · Hamilton Community Foundation · First Financial Foundation · 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 Richard J Fitton Family Fdn 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.