Skip to content
Always Take the Ramp Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Always Take the Ramp Foundation

$30k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2024.

Health$58kPhilanthropy$7kEducation$1kRecreation & Sports$500Human Services$250Other$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k9 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$250
Median grant
3
States reached
$31
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CURE SMA$20,000
CURE SMA$5,000
CHILDREN'S HOSPTIAL OF PHILADELPHIA$3,000
DOUBLE H RANCH$1,000
PHILADELPHIA POWERPLAY INC$250
CURE SMA$250
CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE$250
MAKE A WISH PHILADELPHIA DELAWARE & SISQUEHANNA VALLEY$250
PHILADELPHIA POWERPLAY INC$250
VARIOUS DONATIONS$15
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 (FY24–24, $250) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $250 → 6%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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$62k · 3 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
4

Total granted

$62k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
+7%

Still filing today

67%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
HealthPhilanthropyEducationRecreation & SportsHuman 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

  • FO
    FAMILIES OF SPINAL MUSCULAR ATROPHY DBA CURE SMA
    3× · 2022–2024 · $53k · revenue +1%
  • VD
    VARIOUS DONATIONS
    3× · 2022–2024 · $5k
  • TC
    THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA
    2× · 2023–2024 · $4k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • TP
    THE PENNROSE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $7k · revenue +1%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF UTAH
    one grant, 2022 · $1k
  • VU
    VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2022 · $250 · revenue +7%
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Make-a-Wish Foundation of the Mid-Atlantic Inc

The make-a-wish foundation of the mid-atlantic creates life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

—
2
Make-a-Wish Foundation of San Diego

Together, we create life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

—
3
University of Maryland Pediatric Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Health
4
Make-a-Wish Foundation of America

Together, we create life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

—
5
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
6
Make-a-Wish Foundation of Georgia Inc

Together, we create life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

Philanthropy
7
University of Maryland Anesthesiology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
8
Make-a-Wish Foundation of Metro New York and Western New York

Together, we create life changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

—
9
Make-a-Wish Foundation of Utah Inc

Together, we create life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

—
10
Make-a-Wish Foundation of Colorado

Together, we create life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

Health
11
Make-a-Wish Foundation of Central & South Texas

Together, we create life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

—
12
Make-a-Wish Foundation of Connecticut Inc

Together, we create life-changing wishes for children with critical illnesses.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Philadelphia Delaware and Susquehanna Valley; the most unlike its peers is The Pennrose Foundation. 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FAMILIES OF SPINAL MUSCULAR ATROPHY DBA CURE SMA: $52,750 · HealthFAMILIES OF SPINAL MUSCULAR ATROPHY DBA CURE SMATHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $4,000 · HealthTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA+1 more: $250 · HealthVARIOUS DONATIONS: $5,115 · OtherVARIOUS DO…UNIVERSITY OF UTAH: $1,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY…PHILADELPHIA POWERPLAY INC: $500 · OtherPHILADELPH…Make-A-Wish Foundation of Greater PA and West Virginia Inc: $250 · OtherTHE PENNROSE FOUNDATION: $6,820 · PhilanthropyTHE PENNRO…DOUBLE H HOLE IN THE WOODS RANCH INC: $1,000 · Recreation & SportsCANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $250 · Human ServicesVILLANOVA UNIVERSITY: $250 · Education
Health$57,000Other$6,865Philanthropy$6,820Recreation & Sports$1,000Human Services$250Education$250

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFAMILIES OF SPINAL MUSCULAR ATROPHY DBA CURE SMA: $52,750 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE PENNROSE FOUNDATION: $6,820 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDOUBLE H HOLE IN THE WOODS RANCH INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF PHILADELPHIA DELAWARE AND SUSQUEHANNA VALLEY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVILLANOVA UNIVERSITY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMake-A-Wish Foundation of Greater PA and West Virginia Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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 Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.3× 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 Always Take the Ramp Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Always Take the Ramp Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 11 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Always Take the Ramp’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home