Skip to content
Bostrom Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Bostrom Foundation Inc

Its FY2019 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$4k
Granted FY2019
3
Grants FY2019
1
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2019.

Health$8kEducation$5kReligion$4kArts & Culture$3kEnvironment$2kHuman Services$800Youth Development$500International$450Other$0
02FY2019 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NOTRE DAME MIDDLE SCHOOL$1,638
URBAN ECOLOGY CENTER$1,000
ARTISTS WORKING IN EDUCATION$1,000
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 (FY17–17, $600) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 83% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS: $100 → 8%UNITED COMMUNITY CENTER: $500 → 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

WI
NY
MA
OR
CA
CO
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

48%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$12k · 4 repeat orgs$13k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2019, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
27

Total granted

$12k
$12k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+62%

Still filing today

50%
52%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
HealthArts & CultureInternationalHuman ServicesEnvironmentEducationOther
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

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD
    2× · 2017–2018 · $5k
  • ND
    NOTRE DAME SCHOOL OF MILWAUKEE INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $3k
  • PC
    PENFIELD CHILDREN'S CENTER INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $2k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • SJ
    ST JOHN'S FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $4k
  • I1
    IMPACT 100
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • MU
    Marquette Universitygraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $600 · revenue +36%
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 Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
2
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

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.

Education
3
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
4
Trustees of Tufts College

Education and Research

Education
5
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
6
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
7
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
8
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
9
United Way Worldwide

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

Philanthropy
10
United States Telecom Association

See schedule oustelecom exists to ensure members can compete, grow and thrive to build a world where families, enterprises and communities are connected through the power of broadband.our member companies have committed a considerable…

—
11
Webster University

Founded in 1915, webster is a private non-profit and global university that is committed to delivering high-quality learning experiences that transform students for global citizenship and individual excellence.

Education
12
National Association of Clean Water Agencies

Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Medecins Sans Frontieres Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Glaucoma Society. 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

18 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. 18 of the 33 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)
18/18
Grantees still filing
15/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $5,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODST JOHN'S FOUNDATION: $4,000 · OtherST JOHN'S FOUNDATIONNOTRE DAME SCHOOL OF MILWAUKEE INC: $2,838 · OtherNOTRE DAME SCHOOL OF MILWAUKEE INCIMPACT 100: $1,100 · OtherIMPACT 100THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $950 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYUWM: $600 · Other+12 more: $2,850 · Other+12 moreARTISTS WORKING IN EDUCATION INC: $2,000 · Arts & CultureARTISTS WOR…MILWAUKEE BALLET COMPANY INC: $500 · Arts & CultureMILWAUKEE B…RENAISSANCE THEATERWORKS INC: $200 · Arts & CultureRENAISSANCE…PENFIELD CHILDREN'S CENTER INC: $2,000 · HealthPENFIELD C…AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS ASSN: $300 · HealthAMYOTROPHI…NATIONAL GLAUCOMA SOCIETY: $100 · HealthURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $1,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $100 · EnvironmentMarquette University: $600 · EducationUNIVERSITY LAKE SCHOOL INC: $500 · EducationUNITED COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $500 · Human ServicesFREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC: $100 · Human ServicesMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $250 · InternationalMercy Corps: $100 · InternationalUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $100 · International
Other$17,338Arts & Culture$2,700Health$2,400Environment$1,100Education$1,100Human Services$600International$450

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 budgetPENFIELD CHILDREN'S CENTER INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetARTISTS WORKING IN EDUCATION INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetURBAN ECOLOGY CENTER INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $950 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMarquette University: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMILWAUKEE BALLET COMPANY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY LAKE SCHOOL INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS ASSN: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS FOR PURPLE HEARTS: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRENAISSANCE THEATERWORKS INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRESH AIR FUND: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL GLAUCOMA SOCIETY: $100 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMercy Corps: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $100 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.

Baird Foundation IncFour-Four Foundation …Greater Milwaukee Fou…Gardner FoundationRichard and Ethel Her…Evan & Marion Helfaer…Herbert H Kohl Charit…Green Bay Packers Fou…The Ayco Charitable F…American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…
Baird Foundation IncWI16× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Baird Foundation Inc · Four-Four Foundation Inc · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Gardner Foundation · Richard and Ethel Herzfeld Foundation Inc · Evan & Marion Helfaer Foundation · Herbert H Kohl Charities Inc · Green Bay Packers Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 47%
  • Mercy Corps: 47% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 33 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bostrom’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