· Private foundation
Aronson Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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 $10k32 grants · $55k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $52k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $146k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HARMONY PROJECT HUDSON | $76,200 |
| ECOHEALTH NETWORK AT MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN | $70,000 |
| USC | $16,500 |
| THE JEFFERSON INSTITUTE | $15,000 |
| LAUMEIER SCULPTURE PARK | $10,000 |
| CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF ARTS | $10,000 |
| MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN | $8,000 |
| JONAS SALK FOUNDATION | $7,500 |
| 18TH STREET ARTS CENTER | $7,500 |
| LA SENORA RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| WISE TROPICS INC | $4,000 |
| UPSTATE FILMS | $1,300 |
| CWAYS HOME | $1,300 |
| CONGREGATION EMANU-EL (SF) | $1,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL WOMENS FORUM | $1,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 82% 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 +40% since the first grant, against +27% for the ones you funded once.
66 repeat relationships — 35 still active in FY2024, 31 since wound down; 3 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $16k 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
- HPHARMONY PROJECT HUDSON INC8× · 2017–2024 · $391k · revenue +367% · 60% of their budget
- MBMISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES7× · 2017–2024 · $165k · revenue +37%
- LSLAUMEIER SCULPTURE PARK6× · 2017–2024 · $96k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- NFNY FRIENDS OF CHAMBER MUSICone grant, 2019 · $7k
- PPPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ST LOUISone grant, 2017 · $5k
- LALOS ANGELES INSTITUTE OF THE ARTSone grant, 2018 · $5k
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 society is an international nonprofit, nonpartisan organization which connects people and institutions in asia and the world to build understanding, address challenges and maximize opportunities.
Manhattan school of music is deeply committed to excellence in education, performance, and creative activity; to the humanity of the school's environment; and to the cultural enrichment of the larger community. a premiere international…
The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."
The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
Description of organization mission: the paley center for media is the premier institution dedicated to advancing the understanding of media-it's artistic value, social impact and historical importance-for the public and media…
A center for exhibitions, information, and documentation about living artists since 1977, which continues to be a place of experimentation and a hub of new art and new ideas.
Develops legal and technical infrastructure for digital creativity, sharing, and innovation.
Wmf is the leading independent organization devoted to safeguarding the world's most treasured places to enrich people's lives and build mutual understanding across cultures and communities. the organization is headquartered in new york…
Organization's mission statement true to the ambitious vision of its founder and her spirit of creative risk-taking, the mission of the isabella stewart gardner museum is: - to bring to life and preserve the rich historic collection; - to…
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Harmony Project Hudson Inc and the most unlike its peers is The National Institute for Play. 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 30 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 — 0.0% 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.
63 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. 63 of the 103 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 HARMONY PROJECT HUDSON INC ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES ↗
- Who funds LAUMEIER SCULPTURE PARK ↗
- Who funds 18TH STREET ARTS COMPLEX ↗
- Who funds LA SENORA RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds CWAYS HOME ↗
- Who funds WISE TROPICS INC ↗
- Who funds THE JONAS SALK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GOLDEN BRIDGE ↗
- Who funds The Society for Ecological Restoration Inc ↗
- Who funds BARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds DAY ONE ↗
- Who funds ISLAND PRESS ↗
- Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR AMERICAN POLICE REFORM INC ↗
- Who funds UPSTATE FILMS LTD ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds WHITE HOUSE FELLOWS FOUNDATION AND ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE GARRISON INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER ↗
- Who funds ASHOKA ↗
- Who funds VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds EAST COAST ASSISTANCE DOGS INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds KIDSPIRIT 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: The Bessemer Giving Fund · Community Foundations of the Hudson Valley Inc · David & Sylvia Teitelbaum Fund Inc · Lostand Foundation · The Thompson Family Foundation Inc · Berkshire Taconic Community Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · The Annenberg Foundation · The New York Community Trust · California Community Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Impactassetsinc
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 Aronson 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Aronson Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Aronson Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.