Skip to content
Esmond Harmsworth 1997 Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Esmond Harmsworth 1997 Charitable Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$187k
Granted FY2020
14
Grants FY2020
5
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

Civil Rights$310kHealth$182kPhilanthropy$85kArts & Culture$70kEducation$40kCrime & Legal$30kHousing & Shelter$25kYouth Development$20kOther$0
02FY2020 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k3 grants · $17k
  • $10k–50k11 grants · $170k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOSTON FOUNDATION$25,000
FAMILY EQUALITY COUNCIL$25,000
LAMBDA LEGAL$25,000
MAP (Medical Assistance Programs)$20,000
GLAD$15,000
MSCPA$10,000
PINE STREET INN$10,000
THEATRE OFFENSIVE$10,000
SERO PROJECT$10,000
BETH ISRAEL HOSPITAL$10,000
REDWOOD LIBRARY$10,000
FENWAY HEALTH MEDICAL CENTER$7,000
BOSTON ALLIANCE OF LGBTQ$5,000
YOUTH PRIDE$5,000
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, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE PINE STREET INN: $10k → 16%PINE STREET INN: $10k → 16%THE PINE STREET INN: $5k → 16%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.

45%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$395k · 12 repeat orgs$479k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +178% since the first grant, against +55% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2020, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
14

Total granted

$395k
$427k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+178%
+55%

Still filing today

75%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $52k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
HealthCivil RightsEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureAnimalsOther
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

  • LL
    LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $115k · revenue +196%
  • GLBTQ LEGAL ADVOCATES & DEFENDERS INC
    2× · 2017–2020 · $30k · revenue +236%
  • SP
    SERO PROJECT INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $30k · revenue +178%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $105k
  • FE
    FAMILY EQUALITY COUNCIL
    one grant, 2017 · $75k
  • GI
    GLAAD INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +55%
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
Freedom for All Massachusetts Inc

Freedom for all massachusetts is the bipartisan campaign to ensure fair and equal treatment for transgender people by defending the common wealth's laws against discrimination in public spaces such as restaurants, retail stores, and…

—
2
Equality Federation

Equality federation is an advocacy accelerator rooted in social justice, building power in our network of state-based lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (lgbtq+) advocacy organizations.

Civil Rights
3
Equality Federation Institute

Equality federation institute is an advocacy accelerator rooted in social justice, building power in our network of state-based lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (lgbtq+) advocacy organizations.

Civil Rights
4
New York City Gay and Lesbian Anti-Violence Project

The new york city gay and lesbian anti-violence project (avp) mission is to empower lgbtq and hiv-affected communities and allies to end all forms of violence through organizing and education, and support survivors through counseling and…

—
5
Immigration Equality

Immigration equality promotes justice and equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and hiv-positive immigrants through direct legal services, policy advocacy, and impact litigation.

Civil Rights
6
Out & Equal

To provide leadership and professional development, education and research to create workplaces free from discrimination.

Social Science
7
American Association of Physicians for Human Right

Glma is a national organization committed to ensuring health equity for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (lgbtq) and all sexual and gender minority (sgm) individuals, and equality for lgbtq/sgm health professionals in their work…

Civil Rights
8
Outfront Minnesota

Outfront's mission is to create a state where lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (lgbtq) people are free to be who they are, love who they love, and live without fear of violence, harassment or discrimination. in our effort to…

Civil Rights
9
Anchor Health Initiative Corp

Anchor health is connecticut's leading health center for the lgbtq community. we provide groundbreaking, radically inclusive, gender-affirming, and sex-positive medical, mental health, and pharmacy care as well as supportive services to…

Health
10
Center for Immigrant Protection

The LGBTAP is the only San Francisco nonprofit organization exclusively dedicated to providing accessible legal representation for LGBT asylum seekers who are fleeing persecution due to their sexual orientation, gener identity and/or HIV…

Crime & Legal
11
Women's Law Project

Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…

Civil Rights
12
StartOut

Startout executes its mission and serves its beneficiaries through afull suite of programs critical to an entrepreneur's success,supported by an industry-leading online platform. programs toaccelerate the success of startout entrepreneurs…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bagly Inc; the most unlike its peers is Confetti Foundation. 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

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 32 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
16/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $105,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFAMILY EQUALITY COUNCIL: $75,000 · OtherFAMILY EQUALITY COUNCILMAP (Medical Assistance Programs): $70,000 · OtherMAP (Medical Assistance Programs)GLAAD INC: $50,000 · OtherGLAAD INCBOSTON MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS: $50,000 · OtherBOSTON MUSEUM OF FINE ARTSIndividual grant recipient: $46,577 · OtherIndividual grant recipientREDWOOD LIBRARY: $30,000 · OtherREDWOOD LIBRARYFREEDOM FOR ALL AMERICANS: $25,000 · Other+11 more: $87,000 · Other+11 moreLAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC: $115,000 · Civil RightsLAMBDA LEGAL DEFE…GLBTQ LEGAL ADVOCATES & DEFENDERS INC: $30,000 · Civil RightsGLBTQ LEGAL ADVOC…SERO PROJECT INC: $30,000 · HealthSERO PROJECT …FENWAY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC: $25,000 · HealthFENWAY COMMUN…YOUTH PRIDE INC: $20,000 · HealthYOUTH PRIDE I…BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $20,000 · HealthBETH ISRAEL D…VICTORY PROGRAMS INC: $15,000 · HealthVICTORY PROGR…Boston Foundation Inc: $75,000 · PhilanthropyBoston Fou…TIDES FOUNDATION: $10,310 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUN…FAMILY EQUALITY: $25,000 · EducationAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $10,000 · EducationPINE STREET INN INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesTHE THEATER OFFENSIVE INC: $20,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$538,577Civil Rights$145,000Health$110,000Philanthropy$85,310Education$35,000Human Services$25,000Arts & Culture$20,000

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 budgetLAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC: $115,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetBoston Foundation Inc: $75,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGLAAD INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetGLBTQ LEGAL ADVOCATES & DEFENDERS INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetSERO PROJECT INC: $30,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetPINE STREET INN INC: $25,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFREEDOM FOR ALL AMERICANS: $25,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetFENWAY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY EQUALITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetYOUTH PRIDE INC: $20,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetTHE THEATER OFFENSIVE INC: $20,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetBETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVICTORY PROGRAMS INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $10,310 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEACOLOGY: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBAGLY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEAST BAY FOOD PANTRY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetHOPE & MAIN: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

Wild Geese Foundation…Eastern Bank Foundati…Tides FoundationThe Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Wild Geese Foundation IncMA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Wild Geese Foundation Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Tides Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Esmond Harmsworth 1997 Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Esmond Harmsworth 1997 Charitable 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Victory Programs Inc: 49% of income from government
  • Bagly Inc: 39% of income from government
  • Fenway Community Health Center Inc: 27% of income from government
  • Pine Street Inn Inc: 11% of income from government
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc: 6% of income from government
  • The Theater Offensive Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Glbtq Legal Advocates & Defenders Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Boston Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
0rely 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.

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 32 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2026) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2020, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Esmond Harmsworth 1997’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