Skip to content

· Private foundation

Bertelsmann Foundation (Na) 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.

$137k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Public Benefit$184kArts & Culture$85kSocial Science$65kScience & Tech$54kInternational$29kCommunity Improvement$8kEmployment$6kReligion$800
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$100,000
GERMAN AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM$15,000
HARVARD UNIVERSITY$10,000
HARVARD UNIVERSITY$7,500
WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL$4,000
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.

US giving: 85% of grant dollars ($366k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 15% that went abroad ($64k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 84% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HARVARD UNIVERSITY: $10k → 8%GERMAN AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM: $15k → 17%WORLD AFFAIRS COUNCIL: $4k → 14%ASPEN MINISTERS FORUM: $100k → 14%HARVARD UNIVERSITY: $10k → 8%GERMAN AMERICAN PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM: $10k → 17%THE ASPEN INSTITUTE: $30k → 14%HARVARD UNIVERSITY: $10k → 8%NATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION INC: $40k → 17%GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE US: $10k → 14%HARVARD UNIVERSITY: $8k → 8%ST ALBAN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $300 → 14%HARVARD UNIVERSITY: $5k → 8%GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE US: $10k → 14%HARVARD UNIVERSITY: $5k → 8%INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION FOUNDATION: $8k → 14%Harvard University: $3k → 8%ST ALBAN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $250 → 14%Harvard University: $3k → 8%GOETHE-INSTITUT: $9k → 14%CENTER FOR ELECTION INNOVATION & RESEARCH: $2k → 14%St Alban's Episcopal Church: $250 → 14%DC FILM ALLIANCEDC SHORTS: $2k → 14%The Aspen Institute: $35k → 14%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.

Beyond the US: 15% of all-years giving ($64k)

4 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Belgium$20k · 2 grants
Netherlands$16k · 2 grants
Germany$16k · 2 grants
United Kingdom$12k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 29% of Bertelsmann Foundation (Na) Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 57% of the giving stays in DC; by stated purpose, 33%.

Bertelsmann Foundation (Na) Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 37% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

29%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$111k · 4 repeat orgs$266k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
13

Total granted

$111k
$162k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+590%

Still filing today

75%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 13% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $104k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementInternationalSocial ScienceCivil RightsArts & CultureOther
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

  • THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC
    2× · 2017–2022 · $65k · revenue +243%
  • GA
    German American Partnership Program CO Goethe-Institut
    2× · 2024–2025 · $25k · revenue 0%
  • TG
    THE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATES
    2× · 2023–2024 · $20k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • NATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION INgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $40k · revenue +590%
  • SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $38k · revenue +30%
  • TD
    THE DEMOCRACY & CULTURE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $12k
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
American-German Institute Inc

The American-German Institute is a center for policy research and scholarship dedicated to the most important political, economic, and security issues confronting Germany and the United States in the global arena. AGI anticipates…

Social Science
2
Peter G Peterson Institute for International Economics

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…

Social Science
3
Us-Japan Research Institute Suite 801
—
4
Competition & Innovation Institute
Public Benefit
5
Technology Policy Institute
International
6
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
7
The International Institute for Strategic Studies - Us

To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…

International
8
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
9
National Center for Entrepreneurship and Innovation

NCEI's mission is to mobilize resources and capabilities on a national scale toward the goal of ensuring that 21st century entrepreneurial opportunity and innovative potential reach every community across the nation. Through its work NCEI…

Education
10
Institute for Energy Research

The institute for energy research (ier) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. ier maintains that freely functioning…

Environment
11
Competitive Enterprise Institute

Competitive enterprise institute (cei) is a non-profit public policy organization dedicated to the principles of free enterprise and limited government. we believe that consumers are best helped not by government regulation but by being…

—
12
International Republican Institute

Iri advances freedom and democracy worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, democratic governance and the rule of law.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is German American Partnership Program Co Goethe-Institut. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the 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 20 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $100,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTHE DEMOCRACY & CULTURE FOUNDATION: $12,435 · OtherTHE DEMOCRACY & CULTURE FOUNDATIONSTICHTING ARE WE EUROPE: $11,427 · OtherSTICHTING ARE WE EUROPEGLOBAL PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE (BERLIN): $10,000 · OtherGLOBAL PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE (BERLIN)THE CENTRE FOR FINE ARTS (PALACE OF FINE ARTS): $10,000 · OtherTHE CENTRE FOR FINE ARTS (PALACE OF FINE ARTS)PALACE OF FINE ARTS: $10,000 · OtherPALACE OF FINE ARTSIndividual grant recipient: $9,167 · Other+5 more: $16,800 · Other+5 moreTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $65,000 · Social ScienceTHE ASPEN INSTITU…President and Fellows of Harvard College: $53,500 · EducationPresident and …NATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN: $40,000 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL CEN…Information Technology and Innovation Foundation: $7,500 · Community ImprovementInformation …German American Partnership Program CO Goethe-Institut: $25,000 · InternationalGerman Amer…THE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATES: $20,000 · InternationalTHE GERMAN …SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $37,500 · Arts & CultureSMITHSONI…The Center for Election Innovation & Research: $2,000 · Civil Rights
Other$179,829Social Science$65,000Education$53,500Community Improvement$47,500International$45,000Arts & Culture$37,500Civil Rights$2,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $65,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $53,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN: $40,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION: $37,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGerman American Partnership Program CO Goethe-Institut: $25,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetTHE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATES: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetInformation Technology and Innovation Foundation: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Center for Election Innovation & Research: $2,000 over 1y, 0.7% 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 THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL CENTER FOR CIVIC INNOVATION IN ↗
  • Who funds SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION ↗
  • Who funds German American Partnership Program CO Goethe-Institut ↗
  • Who funds THE GERMAN MARSHALL FUND OF THE UNITED STATES ↗
  • Who funds Information Technology and Innovation Foundation ↗
  • Who funds The Center for Election Innovation & Research ↗

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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Philanthropic TrustPA9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Bertelsmann Foundation (Na) Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bertelsmann Foundation (Na) Inc. 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of 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 · 0–15%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Bertelsmann Foundation (Na) Inc?

Find your warmest path to Bertelsmann Foundation (Na) 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.

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 20 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 Bertelsmann Foundation (Na)’s filings →

More from the funding graph