Skip to content
Douglas B Gardner Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Douglas B Gardner 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.

$11k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$60kEducation$46kRecreation & Sports$46kYouth Development$34kCommunity Improvement$20kPhilanthropy$15kArts & Culture$12kFood & Nutrition$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$112k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEW HEIGHTS YOUTH INC$5,000
SSM INC$5,000
LAGUARDIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION$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 (FY17–20, $61k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%GAME KNIGHTS: $1k → 17%the jcc in manhattan inc: $15k → 17%THE JCC IN MANHATTAN INC: $15k → 17%THE JCC IN MANHATTAN INC: $15k → 17%THE JCC IN MANHATTAN INC: $15k → 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.
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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$207k · 7 repeat orgs$88k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +72% since the first grant, against +2% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
12

Total granted

$207k
$83k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+72%
+2%

Still filing today

57%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentEducationHealthRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • TJ
    THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN MANHATTAN INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $60k · revenue +6%
  • NH
    NEW HEIGHTS YOUTH INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $34k · revenue +166%
  • BY
    BROOKLYN YOUTH SPORTS CLUB INC
    3× · 2018–2023 · $15k · revenue +72%

Funded once

  • V
    VFILES
    one grant, 2021 · $20k
  • HI
    HAMPTONS INVITATIONAL CHARITY PRO-AM
    one grant, 2017 · $11k
  • NR
    NEW RENAISSANCE BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue 0%
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
The Jump and Ball Foundation
Unclassified
2
King Hoops United

Empower the youth of new york city through basketball, providing them with academic enrichment, career development, and a strong sense of community to unlock their full potential

Youth Development
3
The Brooklyn Nets & New York Liberty Foundation
Philanthropy
4
The Baruch College Fund

The baruch college fund is an organization engaged in generating, encouraging and promoting the educational welfare of the students of the bernard m. baruch college of the city university of new york.

Education
5
Luria Academy of Brooklyn

Luria academy is a child-centered environment dedicated to academic excellence and a sophisticated knowledge of jewish text and jewish heritage. located in the prospect heights neighborhood of brookly, luria academy is a jewish…

Education
6
The Neue Galerie New York
Arts & Culture
7
The Young Men's and Young Women's Hebrew Association

For over 150 years, the 92nd street y, new york has been serving its communities and the larger world by bringing people together (continued on schedule o)and providing exceptional, groundbreaking programs in the performing and visual…

Religion
8
The City University of New York School of Law Foundation Inc

The foundation supports the law school in its mission to increase access to legal education to those from groups underrepresented in the profession and to prepare its graduates for public interest and public service practice.

Education
9
The Kids of Nyu Foundation

The KiDS of NYU Foundation, Inc. (the Organization / KiDS) is a voluntary organization of parents, physicians and friends who support children's services at NYU medical Center through philanthropy, community service and advocacy. KiDS…

Health
10
Bronx Baseball Dreams Inc
—
11
Arthur Miller Foundation

To honor the legacy of the great american playwright, arthur miller, and his new york city public school education, the arthur miller foundation (the "foundation") increases equitable access to quality theater education for public school…

Philanthropy
12
Team Steady Buckets

The organization provides children ages 4 to 18, residing in and around New York City, a year-round basketball training program free of charge and a low fee summer day camp basketball program. Organization staff incorporate innovative and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Brooklyn Youth Sports Club Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Applause Arts Foundation Inc. 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

11 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. 11 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $45,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientLAGUARDIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $34,000 · OtherLAGUARDIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATIONVFILES: $20,000 · OtherVFILESHAMPTONS INVITATIONAL CHARITY PRO-AM: $10,500 · OtherHAMPTONS INVITATIONAL CHARITY PRO-AMJOHNS HOPKINS FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherJOHNS HOPKINS FOUNDATIONfood allergy initiative: $7,500 · OtherTHE APPLAUSE ARTS FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 · OtherSSM INC: $5,000 · Other+2 more: $3,800 · OtherTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN MANHATTAN INC: $60,000 · Human ServicesTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY CE…+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesNEW HEIGHTS YOUTH INC: $34,000 · Youth DevelopmentNEW HEIGHTS YOUT…The Bridge Golf Foundation: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentThe Bridge Golf …BROOKLYN YOUTH SPORTS CLUB INC: $15,000 · Recreation & SportsBROOKLYN …NEW RENAISSANCE BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsNEW RENAI…The Ideal School of Manhattan: $12,000 · EducationJUAN PABLO DUARTE FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationTHE ZACHARY & ELIZABETH M FISHER CENTER FOR ALZHEIMER'S RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $3,000 · HealthCHILDREN'S CANCER AND BLOOD FOUNDATION INC: $2,500 · Health
Other$142,800Human Services$61,000Youth Development$44,000Recreation & Sports$25,000Education$17,000Health$5,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER IN MANHATTAN INC: $60,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNEW HEIGHTS YOUTH INC: $34,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetBROOKLYN YOUTH SPORTS CLUB INC: $15,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetThe Ideal School of Manhattan: $12,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNEW RENAISSANCE BASKETBALL ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetThe Bridge Golf Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTHE APPLAUSE ARTS FOUNDATION INC: $7,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetJUAN PABLO DUARTE FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetTHE ZACHARY & ELIZABETH M FISHER CENTER FOR ALZHEIMER'S RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S CANCER AND BLOOD FOUNDATION INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGAME KNIGHTS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 3.7% 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.

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…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA9.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Douglas B Gardner Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Douglas B Gardner Foundation. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 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 Douglas B Gardner’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