Skip to content
Bologna Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Bologna Family Foundation

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.

$732k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$350k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2024 to 2025.

Philanthropy$382kInternational$310kHuman Services$30kFood & Nutrition$20kEnvironment$20kReligion$10kHealth$10kRecreation & Sports$5k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $120k
  • $250k+2 grants · $600k
$20,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST - UBS DAF$350,000
INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION$250,000
SAMARITAN'S PURSE$30,000
AERIAL RECOVERY$20,000
NYC MAMMAS GIVE BACK INC$20,000
ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION$20,000
MEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA$10,000
A21 USA INC$10,000
FAMILY REACH$10,000
STERLING DONOR-ADVISED FUND$7,000
CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY$5,000
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–25, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%A21 USA INC: $10k → 11%WY WOMEN IN AG: $10k → 17%NYC MAMMAS GIVE BACK INC: $20k → 17%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
NY
MA
WY
PA
VA
MD
TN
NC
SC
DC
TX
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 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
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
2
Women's Rights Without Frontiers International

Women's rights without frontiers, international ("wrwf- or "the organization") is a nonprofit entity supporting the rights of women and girls, first in china, then in other countries' communities. the organization was founded by regina…

International
3
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
4
Committee to Protect Journalists Inc

The committee to protect journalists promotes press freedom worldwide and defends the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal. cpj ensures the free flow of news and commentary by taking action wherever…

Civil Rights
5
Air Transport Association of America Inc

Airlines for america (a4a) vigorously advocates for america's airlines as models of safety, customer service, and environmental responsibility; and as the indispensable network that drives our nation's economy and global…

—
6
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
7
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
8
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
9
Nia Tero Foundation

Nia tero works alongside indigenous peoples to secure their guardianship of vital ecosystems. indigenous peoples are guardians of earth.(see schedule o)

Environment
10
United Way Worldwide

To improve lives by mobilizing caring power of communities around the world to advance common good.

Philanthropy
11
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
12
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Philanthropic Trust; the most unlike its peers is Wy Women in Ag. 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

12 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. 12 of the 14 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)
12/12
Grantees still filing
3/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST - UBS DAF: $350,000 · OtherNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST - UBS DAFAERIAL RECOVERY: $20,000 · Other+3 more: $25,000 · Other+3 moreINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $250,000 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSIONSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $40,000 · ReligionNYC MAMMAS GIVE BACK INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesWY WOMEN IN AG: $10,000 · Human ServicesA21 USA INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $25,000 · PhilanthropyTHE STERLING DONOR ADVISED FUND: $7,000 · PhilanthropyORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION: $20,000 · Public BenefitMEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$395,000International$250,000Religion$40,000Human Services$40,000Philanthropy$32,000Public Benefit$20,000Food & Nutrition$10,000

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 budgetINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $250,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNYC MAMMAS GIVE BACK INC: $20,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetWY WOMEN IN AG: $10,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS AMERICA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA21 USA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC: $5,000 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …
National Philanthropic TrustPA8.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Bologna Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bologna Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%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
    1get no government money at all
    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 14 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 Bologna Family’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