· Private foundation
The Skadden Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k17 grants · $51k
- $10k–50k57 grants · $1.9M
- $50k–250k31 grants · $2.7M
- $250k+1 grant · $506k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC | $505,860 |
| NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION | $213,868 |
| LAWYERS COMM FOR CIVIL RIGHTS UNDER LAW | $119,468 |
| PUBLIC JUSTICE FOUNDATION | $114,067 |
| LEGAL AID CHICAGO | $110,001 |
| Individual grant recipient | $101,457 |
| AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF OKLAHOMA FOUNDATION INC | $89,343 |
| BRONX LEGAL SERVICES | $88,489 |
| ASIAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND | $88,109 |
| HOUSING WORKS INC | $87,691 |
| EDUCATION LAW CENTER | $87,420 |
| GEORGIA LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM | $87,254 |
| BROOKLYN DEFENDER SERVICES | $87,150 |
| ADVANCEMENT PROJECT | $84,957 |
| EQUIP FOR EQUALITY | $84,517 |
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 (FY17–24, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 88% 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.
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 +57% since the first grant, against +27% for the ones you funded once.
213 repeat relationships — 61 still active in FY2024, 152 since wound down; 43 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $987k 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
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC3× · 2018–2024 · $862k · revenue +110%
Legal Aid at Work8× · 2017–2024 · $816k · revenue +128%- EFEQUIP FOR EQUALITY8× · 2017–2024 · $520k · revenue +46%
Funded once
- ACAmerican Civil Liberties Union Foundation Inc Developmentone grant, 2021 · $77k
- MEMALD ED Fundone grant, 2022 · $72k
- MSMHA SERVICESone grant, 2022 · $71k
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.
As one of the most enduring civil rights institutions on the West Coast, we work to dismantle systems of oppression and racism, and build an equitable and just society.
The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…
Work with DC courts, private bar & legal services providers to increase legal representations for low & moderate income DC residents, enhance efficiency of legal services, and reduce barriers to the judicial system.
The Public Interest Law Center uses high-impact legal strategies to advance the civil, social, and economic rights of communities in the Philadelphia region facing discrimination, inequality, and poverty. We use litigation, community…
CIVIL LIBERTIES DEFENSE CENTER (CLDC) educates the general public about their rights and privileges under the US Constitution and provides free legal support to climate and social justice activists.
Standing with our neighbors, Lakeshore Legal Aid fights poverty and injustice through advocacy and by providing meaningful and dignified access to the legal system.
Public interest legal activities
Afl-cio union lawyers alliance was established to better the conditions of working men and women and their families by enhancing the quality of legal representation that is available to the afl-cio and the national and international unions…
To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…
To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.
To support the work of the amercian civil liberties union of louisiana through litigation, public education and limited lobbying in support of civil liberties.
To advocate for domestic violence victims, at-risk children, and other vulnerable individuals by providing over $22.8m in pro bono legal services, social service referrals, and on-going support; to train and support a strong network of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Her Justice Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Anita Revers Charitable Foundation Anita R Evers Trustee. 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 41 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
218 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. 218 of the 472 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Legal Aid at Work ↗
- Who funds EQUIP FOR EQUALITY ↗
- Who funds EDUCATION LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN DEFENDER SERVICES ↗
- Who funds NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS RIOGRANDE LEGAL AID INC ↗
- Who funds URBAN JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF NORTH CAROLINA INC ↗
- Who funds ASIAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds LEGAL SERVICES NYC ↗
- Who funds Indiana Legal Services Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds RIGHTS BEHIND BARS INC ↗
- Who funds ARCHCITY DEFENDERS ↗
- Who funds SHRIVER CENTER ON POVERTY LAW ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION A ↗
- Who funds ASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds MENTAL HEALTH ADVOCACY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds LEGAL ASSISTANCE OF WESTERN NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds BAY AREA LEGAL AID ↗
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: Equal Justice Works · The Sidley Austin Foundation · Legal Services Corporation · Borealis Philanthropy · Public Welfare Foundation Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Morrison & Foerster Foundation · The Ford Foundation · The New York Bar Foundation · Equal Justice America Inc · California Access to Justice Commission · American College of Bankruptcy 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 Skadden Foundation 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.
- Victim Rights Law Center Inc — 89% of income from government
- National Association of the Deaf — 58% of income from government
- Disability Law Center Inc — 57% of income from government
- Veterans Legal Services Inc — 16% of income from government
- Connecticut Veterans Legal Center Inc — 12% of income from government
- Oregon Law Center — 11% of income from government
- Casa Inc — 8% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Northeast Legal Aid Inc — 7% of income from government
- Community Legal Aid Inc — 5% of income from government
- Center for Childrens Advocacy Inc — 5% of income from government
- Greater Boston Legal Services Inc — 3% of income from government
- New Haven Legal Assistance Association Inc — 2% of income from government
- Legal Services of Greater Miami Inc — 2% of income from government
- Youth Advocacy Foundation Inc — 1% of income from government
- National Consumer Law Center Inc — 1% of income from government
- Justice at Work Inc — 0% of income from government
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.