· Private foundation
Carl Forstmann Memorial 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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k25 grants · $74k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ALEXANDER TWILIGHT ACADEMY | $10,000 |
| WALDORF SCHOOL | $9,000 |
| CHESAPEAKE CHARITIES | $8,000 |
| ST IGNATIUS COLLEGE PREP | $6,000 |
| WASHINGTON COLLEGE | $5,000 |
| STANDEARTH | $5,000 |
| CHESTERTOWN RIVER ARTS | $5,000 |
| WOODWELL CLIMATE RESEARCH CENTER | $4,000 |
| PATHWAYS INC | $3,000 |
| LAKOTA WALDORF SCHOOL | $2,000 |
| TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES | $2,000 |
| MARTIAL ARTS INSTITUTE OF THE BERKSHIRES | $2,000 |
| REBUILDING TOGETHER KENT COUNTY | $2,000 |
| ST THOMAS AQUINAS SCHOOL | $2,000 |
| THE CHILDRENS SCHOLARSHIP FUND | $2,000 |
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 (FY19–19, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +44% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
35 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 7 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, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $19k 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
- WCWASHINGTON COLLEGE5× · 2019–2024 · $21k · revenue +32%
- ATALEXANDER TWILIGHT ACADEMY INC2× · 2023–2024 · $16k · revenue +135%
- TATRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES INC5× · 2019–2024 · $14k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- CHCOMPASS HOSPICE OF QUEENSone grant, 2023 · $5k
- EAESPERANZA ACADEMYone grant, 2023 · $4k
- OOONLY ONE INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $4k · revenue +627%
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 University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.
New york school of interior design provides the most innovative, immersive, and transformative interior design education in the world, demonstrating the impact of professionally designed interiors on the health, happiness, and well-being…
Wentworth institute of technology is a nationally recognized private coeducational and residential university of higher education with a mission to empower, inspire and innovate through experiential learning with a core purpose of career…
The mission of south shore charter school is to cultivate students the tenacity, integrity, and curiosity needed to become innovative and socially responsible leaders, ready to face and solve the ever-changing challenges facing our…
Bates is a college of the liberal arts and sciences, and is a coeducational, nonsectarian, residential college with special commitments to academic rigor, and to assuring in all of its efforts the dignity of each individual, and access to…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
Wheaton college provides a transformative liberal arts education, combining theory and practice, for intellectually curious students within a collaborative and vibrant extended community and network that values and strives to create an…
We provide exemplary interdisciplinary programs for a community of scholar-practitioners within a distributed learning model grounded in student-driven inquiry and leading to enhanced knowledge.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Farm Sanctuary Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sacha Munay. 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 35 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.
41 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. 41 of the 68 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 WOLAKOTA WALDORF SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds ALEXANDER TWILIGHT ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES INC ↗
- Who funds NYAKA INC ↗
- Who funds Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc ↗
- Who funds THE WALDORF SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds THE CHILDRENS SCHOLARSHIP FUND ↗
- Who funds CHESAPEAKE CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds STAND ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds FUTURE 5 INC ↗
- Who funds Rebuilding Together Eastern Shore Inc ↗
- Who funds GREENWICH COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds Williams College ↗
- Who funds JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds DIGS WITH DIGNITY CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ONLY ONE INC ↗
- Who funds THE BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BRIDGEPORT RESCUE MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD LINK INC ↗
- Who funds ONE TREE PLANTED INC ↗
- Who funds PATHWAYS 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: Boston Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Verizon Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation
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 Carl Forstmann Memorial 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Pacific House Inc — 46% of income from government
- Pathways Inc — 45% of income from government
- Rebuilding Together Eastern Shore Inc — 12% of income from government
- Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc — 11% of income from government
- Food Link Inc — 9% of income from government
- Als Therapy Development Foundation Inc — 8% of income from government
- Washington College — 0% of income from government
- Williams College — 0% 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 Carl Forstmann Memorial Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Carl Forstmann Memorial 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.