Skip to content

· Private foundation

Duchen 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.

$13k
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it funds
0179% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Animals$6kEnvironment$2kReligion$2kPhilanthropy$2kEducation$1kHealth$1kScience & Tech$900Community Improvement$888Other$0
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$550
Median grant
5
States reached
$278k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AAJC$1,388
Individual grant recipient$1,000
AWF$1,000
CAT TOWN$1,000
Individual grant recipient$888
EAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT$888
IFAW$650
ST JUDE HOSPITAL$636
ALAMENDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$600
WWF$550
Individual grant recipient$550
FNDI$500
UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS$500
EARTH JUSTICE$500
MUTTVILLE$500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 69% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BOSTON COLLEGE: $750 → 7%IFAW: $650 → 8%STONE ZOO: $1k → 8%MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL: $100 → 16%CAT TOWN: $1k → 9%ST JUDE HOSPITAL: $636 → 10%EAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT: $888 → 10%MUTTVILLE: $500 → 10%PASADENA HUMANE: $500 → 14%LOVE OF LEARNING FUND: $210 → 7%ASPCA: $100 → 17%WWF: $550 → 14%BARN SANCTUARY: $516 → 14%ST JUDE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $375 → 17%NATIONAL ASIAN PACIFIC: $888 → 14%CONSERCATION INTERNATIONAL: $550 → 7%MISSING KIDS ORG: $400 → 9%BOSTON COLLEGE: $350 → 7%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $500 → 8%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF BOSTON: $375 → 16%CAT TOWN: $200 → 9%ALAMENDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $600 → 10%MUTTVILLE: $500 → 10%BARN SANCTUARY: $500 → 14%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: $500 → 17%WWF: $500 → 14%BARN SANCTUARY: $258 → 14%CONSERCATION INTERNATIONAL: $500 → 7%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $400 → 8%TRI VALLEY ANIMAL RESCUE: $100 → 10%FNDI: $500 → 14%HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE US: $500 → 14%BARN SANCTUARY: $200 → 14%AWF: $1k → 14%FNDI: $400 → 14%AWF: $500 → 14%AAJC: $1k → 14%AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $500 → 14%EARTH JUSTICE: $500 → 14%EARTH JUSTICE: $400 → 14%AAJC: $400 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
MI
NY
MA
CA
VA
TN
DC
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.

61%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$13k · 12 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
9

Total granted

$13k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+14%

Still filing today

50%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’24’25
AnimalsHealthEnvironmentInternationalEducationCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • TRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE
    2× · 2021–2025 · $1k · revenue +26%
  • EARTHJUSTICE
    2× · 2024–2025 · $900 · revenue +22%
  • BS
    BARN SANCTUARY
    2× · 2021–2022 · $774 · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • HW
    Humane World for Animals Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $500 · revenue -20%
  • AW
    AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $500 · revenue +14%
  • AC
    AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
    one grant, 2021 · $500
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
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
2
The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

To ensure every companion animal has access to quality medical care, compassionate shelter, and a loving home.

Animals
3
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
4
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc

Protection of animal rights

Animals
5
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
6
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
7
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
8
San Diego Humane Society and Spca

Create a more humane world by inspiring compassion, providing hope and advancing the welfare of animals and people.

Animals
9
Conservation Society of California

Through management of oakland zoo, the conservation society of california deepens connection with animals, saves wildlife, and inspires champions for the natural world.

Animals
10
Four Paws International Inc

Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.

Animals
11
Environmental and Animal Defense

At Environmental and Animal Defense, our mission is to provide Colorado with access to affordable legal services for environmental and animal issues, in addition to protecting wildlife and their habitats through enforcement of the law. No…

Crime & Legal
12
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cat Town; the most unlike its peers is Trustees of Boston College. 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

16 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. 16 of the 30 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
10/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AAJC: $1,788 · OtherAAJCAWF: $1,500 · OtherAWFIndividual grant recipient: $1,050 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWWF: $1,050 · OtherWWFIndividual grant recipient: $1,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFNDI: $900 · OtherFNDIIndividual grant recipient: $888 · OtherIndividual grant recipientBARN SANCTUARY: $700 · OtherBARN SANCTUARYALAMENDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $600 · OtherALAMENDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANKAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: $500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $400 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITABLE BUREAU OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOSTON INC: $375 · Other+4 more: $462 · OtherCAT TOWN: $1,200 · AnimalsCAT TOWNMUTTVILLE: $1,000 · AnimalsMUTTVILLEBARN SANCTUARY: $774 · AnimalsBARN SANCTUARYINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $650 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIM…Humane World for Animals Inc: $500 · AnimalsHumane World for Animals In…PASADENA HUMANE: $500 · AnimalsPASADENA HUMANEAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $500 · AnimalsAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION…+1 more: $100 · AnimalsTRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE: $1,100 · EducationST JUDE HOSPITAL: $636 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $375 · HealthEARTHJUSTICE: $900 · EnvironmentTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $900 · InternationalEAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $888 · Community Improvement
Other$11,213Animals$5,224Education$1,100Health$1,011Environment$900International$900Community Improvement$888

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 budgetCAT TOWN: $1,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON COLLEGE: $1,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMUTTVILLE: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBARN SANCTUARY: $774 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $650 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITABLE BUREAU OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF BOSTON INC: $375 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $375 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTri-Valley Animal Rescue: $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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE8.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation 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 Duchen Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Duchen Foundation. 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Trustees of Boston College: 3% 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 · 0–15%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Duchen Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Duchen 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.

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 30 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 Duchen’s filings →

More from the funding graph