Skip to content
Daniel W Field Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Daniel W Field Trust

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.

$516k
Granted FY2025still arriving
25
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$130k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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, FY2019 to 2025.

Recreation & Sports$1.1MReligion$649kHuman Services$607kHealth$483kPublic Safety & Disaster$171kPhilanthropy$171kYouth Development$152kCivil Rights$45kOther$0
02FY2025 · 25 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $42k
  • $10k–50k15 grants · $345k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $130k
$13,004
Median grant
2
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF BROCKTON FBO FIELD PARK$130,037
CITY OF BROCKTON FOR FIELD SCHOOL$39,011
YMCA OLD COLONY BROCKTON$39,011
CATHOLIC CHARITABLE BUREAU$26,007
MAYFLOWER COUNCIL BOYS SCOUTS OF AMERICA$26,007
SIGNATURE HEALTH BROCKTON HOSPITAL$26,007
GODDARD HEALTH SERVICES INC$26,007
MSPCC OF FRANKLIN COUNTY$26,007
BROCKTON VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION$26,007
AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS$26,007
CHRIST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH$22,756
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GTR BOSTON$13,004
TTEES HOWARD HOME FOR AGED MEN$13,004
GIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS$13,004
EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH$11,391
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 (FY19–25, $257k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GRTR BOSTON: $39k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $33k → 14%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $30k → 14%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GTR BOSTON: $26k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $26k → 14%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $25k → 14%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GTR BOSTON: $13k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $20k → 14%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $19k → 14%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GTR BOSTON: $9k → 8%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $17k → 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.
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.3M · 33 repeat orgs$95k to everyone else

33 repeat relationships: 24 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
3

Total granted

$3.3M
$56k

Still filing today

18%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $39k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    7× · 2019–2025 · $171k · revenue +39%
  • BV
    Brockton Visiting Nurse Association Inc
    7× · 2019–2025 · $171k · revenue +4%
  • BH
    Brockton Hospital Inc
    7× · 2019–2025 · $142k · revenue +63%

Funded once

  • OC
    OLD COLONY COUNCIL INC
    one grant, 2019 · $30k
  • CO
    CITY OF BROCKTON FOR FIELD SCH
    one grant, 2024 · $26k
  • GO
    GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH OF BROCKTON
    one grant, 2023 · $381
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 37 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)
6/6
Grantees still filing
5/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF BROCKTON FBO FIELD PARK: $553,996 · OtherCITY OF BROCKTON FBO FIELD PARKCITY OF BROCKTON FBO FIELD PK: $489,976 · OtherCITY OF BROCKTON FBO FIELD PKYMCA OLD COLONY BROCKTON: $255,814 · OtherYMCA OLD COLONY BROCKTONCATHOLIC CHARITABLE BUREAU: $170,542 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITABLE BUREAUMSPCC OF FRANKLIN COUNTY: $170,542 · OtherMSPCC OF FRANKLIN COUNTYGODDARD HEALTH SERVICES INC: $170,542 · OtherGODDARD HEALTH SERVICES INCCHRIST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH: $149,225 · OtherMAYFLOWER COUNCIL BOYS SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $95,161 · Other+24 more: $767,046 · Other+24 moreBrockton Visiting Nurse Association Inc: $170,542 · HealthBrockton V…Brockton Hospital Inc: $141,976 · HealthBrockton H…American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $170,542 · Human ServicesJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GREATER BOSTON: $86,701 · Human ServicesGIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS INC: $22,389 · Youth Development
Other$2,822,844Health$312,518Human Services$257,243Youth Development$22,389

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 budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $170,542 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetGODDARD HEALTH SERVICES INC: $170,542 over 7y, 9.0% of budgetBrockton Visiting Nurse Association Inc: $170,542 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetBrockton Hospital Inc: $141,976 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GREATER BOSTON: $86,701 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS INC: $22,389 over 3y, 0.1% 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 American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds GODDARD HEALTH SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds Brockton Visiting Nurse Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds Brockton Hospital Inc ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERS OF GREATER BOSTON ↗
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF EASTERN MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Daniel W Field Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Daniel W Field Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • Brockton Hospital Inc: 13% of income from government
  • Brockton Visiting Nurse Association Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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 37 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 Daniel W Field’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