· Private foundation
Barnstone Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 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 FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k7 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $465k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BOSTON HEALTHCARE FOR THE HOMELESS PROGRAM | $45,000 |
| LA COLABORATIVA INC | $45,000 |
| EDEN REFORESTATION PROJECTS | $40,000 |
| ACTIVE MINDS | $40,000 |
| MAINE COAST HERITAGE TRUST | $30,000 |
| TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA | $30,000 |
| GOOD WORKS INC | $27,000 |
| MAYO CLINIC | $25,000 |
| CONVOY OF HOPE | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| CB COMMUNITY SCHOOLS | $25,000 |
| THE SUPPORT CENTER FOR CHILD ADVOCATES | $25,000 |
| CHESTER COUNTY FOOD BANK | $20,000 |
| FOSTERING HOPE GRANT AWARD | $16,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
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 (FY20–25, $309k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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 +32% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
41 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2025, 27 since wound down; 6 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, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $79k 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
BOSTON HEALTH CARE FOR THE HOMELESS PROGRAM INC5× · 2020–2025 · $207k · revenue +54%- GWGOOD WORKS INC8× · 2018–2025 · $192k · revenue +56%
- TCTHE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA FOUNDATION6× · 2020–2025 · $128k · revenue +159%
Funded once
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCone grant, 2022 · $23k · revenue -40%- HCHAWAIIAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $23k
- STSHOES THAT FITgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue +29%
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.
Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service
To provide exceptional healthcare services in a safe and trustful environment through the expertise, committment, and compassion of our family of caregivers.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
Commonwealth care alliance, inc.'s mission is to improve the health and well-being of people with significant needs by innovating, coordinating and providing the highest quality, individualized care.
Organization's mission to improve health outcomes for children; be a leader in creating innovative solutions to pediatric healthcare problems; and excel in care, advocacy, research. as the nation's children's hospital, the mission of…
As the parent entity of a blended health organization, highmark health seeks to improve the health and well-being of the people and communities it serves by providing affordable, accessible and high-quality healthcare.
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.
Our mission is to solve hunger in central pennsylvania by ensuring that everyone struggling with hunger has access to enough wholesome food every day. we will achieve this bold goal with the help of our generous donors, volunteers and…
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
To make kids better today and healthier tomorrow.
The foundation is set up to deliver one program - look good feel better. the mission of this nationwide program is to improve the quality of life of women, men, and teens undergoing cancer treatment by offering advice on how to cope with…
City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Philadelphia Museum of Art. 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 33 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
56 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. 56 of the 74 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 TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds BOSTON HEALTH CARE FOR THE HOMELESS PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds GOOD WORKS INC ↗
- Who funds EDEN PEOPLEPLANET ↗
- Who funds Support Center for Child Advocates ↗
- Who funds THE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF PHILADELPHIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds CB COMMUNITY SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds CHESTER COUNTY FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds DOVE INC ↗
- Who funds Active Minds Inc ↗
- Who funds Maine Coast Heritage Trust ↗
- Who funds GULF OF MAINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds VICTORY PROGRAMS INC ↗
- Who funds LA COLABORATIVA INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR DISASTER PHILANTHROPY INC ↗
- Who funds Wings for Success Inc ↗
- Who funds CONVOY OF HOPE ↗
- Who funds MY STUFF BAGS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds FRENCH AND PICKERING CREEKS CONSERVATION TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE OCEAN CLEANUP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SHOES THAT FIT ↗
- Who funds ALEXS LEMONADE STAND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CHARLESTOWN PLAYHOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds TREVOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND FORESTRY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Philabundance ↗
- Who funds RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARTIES OF NORTHEASTERN PENSYLVANIA INC ↗
- Who funds BABY2BABY ↗
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: Td Charitable Foundation · Hankin Foundation · Chester County Community Foundation · Analog Devices Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Verizon Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Network for Good
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 Barnstone Foundation Inc 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.
- New England Forestry Foundation Inc — 88% of income from government
- Dove Inc — 60% of income from government
- Victory Programs Inc — 49% of income from government
- La Colaborativa Inc — 34% of income from government
- Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program Inc — 8% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Barnstone Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Barnstone Foundation Inc 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.