· Private foundation
Alan D & Judith Tobin Charitable Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k14 grants · $4k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY | $10,000 |
| THE SHARED HUMANITY PROJECT | $800 |
| FRENCHMANS CREEK CHARITIES FOUNDATION | $500 |
| JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY | $500 |
| DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE | $250 |
| CHARLES RIVER CENTER | $250 |
| ISRAEL TENNIS CENTERS FOUNDATION | $250 |
| AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION | $250 |
| STANLEY M ISSACS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER | $250 |
| Individual grant recipient | $200 |
| PLAY FOR PINK | $200 |
| BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW | $200 |
| NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW | $150 |
| Individual grant recipient | $125 |
| NEWTON WELLESLEY HOSPITAL | $100 |
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, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 74% 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 +52% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY5× · 2018–2025 · $40k · revenue +87%- JMJupiter Medical Center Inc6× · 2018–2023 · $7k · revenue +89%
- FCFRENCHMANS CREEK CHARITIES FOUNDATION INC9× · 2017–2025 · $7k · revenue +119%
Funded once
- 2C2LIFE COMMUNITIES INCone grant, 2018 · $1k · revenue -40%
- MJMALTZ JUPITER THEATRE INCone grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue -28%
- MHMOISHE HOUSEone grant, 2024 · $450 · revenue 0%
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.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
Non-profit organization dedicated to improving the physical, spiritual and emotional health of individuals and families.
Mass general brigham health plan's mission is to promote the health and wellness of our members, and to help ensure equitable, affordbale health care for the diverse communities we serve.
The mission of hsl hospice is to provide exceptional care to terminally ill patients and their families allowing patients to attain the highest quality of life possible. hsl hospice aims to provide the highest quality hospice service that…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The mjhs institute for innovation in palliative care is a not-for-profit organization. the institute is dedicated to promoting access to evidence-based, specialist-level palliative care for patients and families coping with serious or…
Mjhs health system is a charitable not-for-profit established to support the activities of affiliated organizations. mjhs is built on the core values of compassion, dignity and respect, first established by the four brooklyn ladies in…
Boston university affiliated physicians, inc.'s (buap) primary mission is to provide health care services in a manner that promotes health for the benefit of the community, to perform medical and clinical research in the public interest,…
Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.
Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.
North shore health system medical faculty group practice (the corporation) functions as an extension of the northwell health hospitals by bringing medical care to community settings, providing care to medicare, medicaid, and other…
Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Newbridge on the charles inc and the most unlike its peers is Holliston Historical Society. 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 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
48 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. 48 of the 91 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 NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Jupiter Medical Center Inc ↗
- Who funds FRENCHMANS CREEK CHARITIES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc ↗
- Who funds SHARED HUMANITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds A WIDER CIRCLE INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds EXHALE TO INHALE INC ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds CROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY HILLEL ADVISORY ↗
- Who funds 2LIFE COMMUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MALTZ JUPITER THEATRE INC ↗
- Who funds THE BRAIN ANEURYSM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds JEROME GOLDEN CENTER FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL TENNIS CENTERS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MOISHE HOUSE ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Corporation ↗
- Who funds PATHWAY TO POSSIBLE INC ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds CHARLES RIVER ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS INC ↗
- Who funds STANLEY M ISAACS NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Newbridge on the charles inc ↗
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: Boston Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · 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 Alan D & Judith Tobin Charitable 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Pathway to Possible Inc — 84% of income from government
- Care Dimensions Inc — 14% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Silent Spring Institute Inc — 12% of income from government
- The Lord's Place Inc — 12% of income from government
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% of income from government
- 2LIFE Communities Inc — 8% of income from government
- Northeastern University — 7% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- A Wider Circle Inc — 6% of income from government
- Jupiter Medical Center Inc — 2% of income from government
- Suffolk University — 1% of income from government
- Bentley University — 1% of income from government
- Hebrew Senior Life Inc — 0% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge 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.