Skip to content

· Private foundation

Edward and Barbara Urban Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$149k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$75k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$298kRecreation & Sports$98kReligion$92kEnvironment$52kPublic Benefit$48kEducation$43kHealth$10kFood & Nutrition$9kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $9k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $140k
$65,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORKSHOP 13 INC$75,000
EAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST$65,000
THE LITERACY PROJECT$7,500
TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD$1,500
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%EAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST: $65k → 11%WORKSHOP 13 INC: $100k → 12%THE LITERACY PROJECT: $8k → 14%GRONK NATION YOUTH FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%EAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST: $25k → 11%TOWN OF WARE: $90k → 12%THE LITERACY PROJECT: $8k → 14%EAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST: $17k → 11%WORKSHOP 13 INC: $75k → 12%THE LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 14%EAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST: $10k → 11%WORKSHOP 13 INC: $50k → 12%THE LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 14%FRIENDS OF STONE CHURCH INC: $5k → 11%WORKSHOP 13 INC: $50k → 12%THE LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 14%WORKSHOP 13 INC: $42k → 12%THE LITERACY PROJECT: $5k → 14%WORKSHOP 13 INC: $25k → 12%TOWN OF WARE: $25k → 12%WORKSHOP 13 INC: $20k → 12%YOUNG MEN'S LIBRARY ASSOCIATION: $15k → 12%TOWN OF WARE: $13k → 12%ST MARY'S CHURCH: $12k → 12%QUABOAG VALLEY COMMUNITY: $10k → 12%PROPRIETORS OF THE WARE CENTER MEETING HOUSE: $10k → 12%FRIENDS OF WARE TOWN HALL: $10k → 12%ST MARY'S CHURCH: $10k → 12%QUABOAG VALLEY COMMUNITY: $9k → 12%TOWN OF WARE: $8k → 12%TOWN OF WARE: $6k → 12%PROPRIETORS OF THE WARE CENTER: $5k → 12%KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS: $5k → 12%KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS WARE COUNCIL # 183: $3k → 12%UNITED CHURCH: $3k → 12%KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS WARE COUNCIL # 183: $3k → 12%TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD: $2k → 12%TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD: $2k → 12%TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD: $2k → 12%TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD: $2k → 12%TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD: $2k → 12%TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD: $2k → 12%TRINITY CHURCH - JUBILEE CUPBOARD: $2k → 12%TOWN OF WARE: $1k → 12%PROPRIETORS OF THE WARE CENTER MEETING HOUSE: $1k → 12%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$726k · 9 repeat orgs$108k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +121% since the first grant, against +84% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
9

Total granted

$726k
$108k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+121%
+84%

Still filing today

44%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Arts & CultureEnvironmentHealthOther
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

  • W1
    WORKSHOP 13 INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $362k · revenue +121% · 26% of their budget
  • EQ
    EAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST INC
    4× · 2019–2025 · $117k · revenue +380%
  • TL
    THE LITERACY PROJECT
    6× · 2019–2025 · $35k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • DO
    DIOCESE OF SPRINGFIELD BEACON OF FAITH
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
  • YM
    YOUNG MENS LIBRARY ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +84%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF WARE TOWN HALL
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
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 18 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
4/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WORKSHOP 13 INC: $362,496 · Arts & CultureWORKSHOP 13 INC+1 more: $11,000 · Arts & CultureTOWN OF WARE: $142,500 · OtherTOWN OF WAREDIOCESE OF SPRINGFIELD BEACON OF FAITH: $50,000 · OtherDIOCESE OF SPRINGFIELD BEACON OF FAITHTHE LITERACY PROJECT: $35,000 · OtherTHE LITERACY PROJECTST MARY'S CHURCH: $22,375 · OtherST MARY'S CHURCHIndividual grant recipient: $18,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientYOUNG MENS LIBRARY ASSOCIATION: $15,000 · Other+8 more: $49,900 · Other+8 moreEAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST INC: $117,000 · EnvironmentEAST QUABBIN LA…BAYSTATE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · Health
Arts & Culture$373,496Other$333,275Environment$117,000Health$10,000

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 budgetWORKSHOP 13 INC: $362,496 over 7y, 26% of budgetEAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST INC: $117,000 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetTHE LITERACY PROJECT: $35,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetYOUNG MENS LIBRARY ASSOCIATION: $15,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetBAYSTATE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 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 WORKSHOP 13 INC ↗
  • Who funds EAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LITERACY PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG MENS LIBRARY ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Proprietors of the Ware Center Meeting House ↗
  • Who funds BAYSTATE HEALTH FOUNDATION 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Edward and Barbara Urban Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Edward and Barbara Urban Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2022
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 49%
  • East Quabbin Land Trust Inc: 70% of income from government
  • The Literacy Project: 49% of income from government
  • Workshop 13 Inc: 8% of income from government
  • Baystate Health Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
1rely on government for over half their income
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 Edward and Barbara Urban Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Edward and Barbara Urban 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 18 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 Edward and Barbara Urban’s filings →

More from the funding graph