Skip to content

· Private foundation

Alice C Jones Charitable Trust Uw

THE TRUST'S ACTIVITIES WILL BE MAKING GRANTS AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE RECOGNIZED BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AS BEING DESCRIBED IN SECTION 501(C)(3) OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE.

$170k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$51k
Largest
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$352kRecreation & Sports$235kCivil Rights$235kEducation$235kHuman Services$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $119k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $51k
$34,017
Median grant
5
States reached
$4.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ISLANDS COMMUNITY MEDICAL SERVICES INC$51,026
ALOHA FOUNDATION INC$34,017
AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE$34,017
NEW JERSEY STATE LIBRARY$17,009
OGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE$17,009
THE ESTAUGH$17,009
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY19–25, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%THE ESTAUGH: $17k → 7%THE ESTAUGH: $17k → 7%THE ESTAUGH: $16k → 7%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 7 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
1

Total granted

$1.2M
$17k

Still filing today

71%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthRecreation & SportsEducationHuman ServicesOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • IC
    ISLANDS COMMUNITY MEDICAL SERVICES
    7× · 2019–2025 · $352k · revenue +29%
  • TA
    THE ALOHA FOUNDATION INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $235k · revenue +3%
  • OL
    OGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE
    7× · 2019–2025 · $117k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • NJ
    NEW JERSEY STATE LIBRARY
    one grant, 2025 · $17k
How this is measured

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

04Its field
04the grantee network

5 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 8 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
5/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEE: $234,609 · OtherAMERICAN FRIENDS SERVICE COMMITTEENew Jersey Library Association: $100,294 · OtherNew Jersey Library AssociationIndividual grant recipient: $67,429 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNEW JERSEY STATE LIBRARY: $17,009 · OtherISLANDS COMMUNITY MEDICAL SERVICES: $351,912 · HealthISLANDS COMMUNITY MEDICAL SERVICESTHE ALOHA FOUNDATION INC: $234,609 · Recreation & SportsTHE ALOHA FOUNDATION I…OGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE: $117,303 · EducationOGLALA LAKO…THE ESTAUGH TA MEDFORD LEAS: $49,874 · Human Services
Other$419,341Health$351,912Recreation & Sports$234,609Education$117,303Human Services$49,874

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetISLANDS COMMUNITY MEDICAL SERVICES: $351,912 over 7y, 1.7% of budgetTHE ALOHA FOUNDATION INC: $234,609 over 7y, 0.7% of budgetOGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE: $117,303 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetNew Jersey Library Association: $100,294 over 6y, 5.8% of budgetTHE ESTAUGH TA MEDFORD LEAS: $49,874 over 3y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds ISLANDS COMMUNITY MEDICAL SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds THE ALOHA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds OGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds New Jersey Library Association ↗
  • Who funds THE ESTAUGH TA MEDFORD LEAS ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Alice C Jones Charitable Trust Uw funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Alice C Jones Charitable Trust Uw. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • New Jersey Library Association: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 8 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

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

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Alice C Jones Charitable Trust Uw’s filings →

More from the funding graph