Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Fields Pond Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$528k
Granted FY2024still arriving
43
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.

Environment$2.2MRecreation & Sports$99kFood & Nutrition$76kCommunity Improvement$30kPublic Benefit$15kHealth$13kAnimals$12kArts & Culture$6k
02FY2024 · 43 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k13 grants · $74k
  • $10k–50k30 grants · $455k
$10,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BULL CREEK COMMON LANDS INC$25,000
HARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST$25,000
TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS$25,000
MOUNT GRACE LAND CONSERVATION TRUST$25,000
SCARBOROUGH LAND CONSERVATION TRUST$20,000
GREEN MOUNTAIN CONSERVANCY INC$20,000
WESTERLY LAND TRUST$20,000
PUTNEY MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION INC$20,000
KESTREL LAND TRUST INC$15,000
WOODSTOCK CONSERVATION COMMISSION$15,000
ESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION INC$15,000
THE ANDOVER VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT SOCIETY$15,000
HARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST$15,000
HARVARD CONSERVATION TRUST$15,000
Individual grant recipient$15,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 68% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%NEPONSET RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION: $20k → 7%WILDLANDS TRUST INC: $15k → 8%STOW CONSERVATION TRUST: $15k → 8%GROUNDWORK LAWRENCE INC: $15k → 10%BUZZARDS BAY COALITION: $15k → 11%TOWN OF LEVERETT: $15k → 14%BOSTON FARMS COMMUNITY LAND TRUST INC: $15k → 16%NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION: $15k → 9%AGRICULTURAL STEWARDSHIP ASSOCIATION: $15k → 11%MOHAWK HUDSON LAND CONSERVANCY: $15k → 14%WESTERLY LAND TRUST: $20k → 7%WINDMILL HILL PINNACLE ASSOCIATION: $15k → 11%SWAINS LAKE VILLAGE WATER DISTRICT: $17k → 9%MIDCOAST CONSERVANCY: $15k → 9%COASTAL MOUNTAINS LAND TRUST: $15k → 11%MAINE FARMLAND TRUST: $15k → 13%RANGELEY LAKES HERITAGE TRUST: $20k → 14%ROCHESTER LAND TRUST: $15k → 8%ESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION INC: $25k → 10%WESTPORT LAND CONSERVATION TRUST: $20k → 11%BERKSHIRE NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL INC: $25k → 12%TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS: $25k → 16%BETHANY LAND TRUST: $15k → 12%BULL CREEK COMMON LANDS INC: $25k → 9%VERMONT YOUTH CONSERVATION CORPS: $15k → 10%PUTNEY MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION INC: $20k → 11%TOWN OF HAMPTON: $20k → 5%PISCATAQUOG LAND CONSERVANCY: $15k → 7%MOOSE MOUNTAINS REGIONAL GREENWAYS: $25k → 9%BLUE HILL HERITAGE TRUST: $15k → 11%MAINE FARMLAND TRUST: $15k → 13%FOREST SOCIETY OF MAINE: $20k → 15%ESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION INC: $25k → 10%COMMUNITY HARVEST PROJECT INC: $15k → 11%BERKSHIRE NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL INC: $25k → 12%THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $15k → 16%CHAMPLAIN AREA TRAILS: $20k → 13%ROYAL RIVER CONSERVATION TRUST: $20k → 7%ESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION INC: $25k → 10%ORLEANS CONSERVATION TRUST: $25k → 8%ESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION INC: $25k → 10%DAMARISCOTTA RIVER ASSOCIATION: $25k → 9%ORLEANS CONSERVATION TRUST: $20k → 8%NORTH COUNTY LAND TRUST INC: $25k → 11%THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND PORTLAND OFFIC: $25k → 7%COASTAL RIVERS CONSERVATION TRUST: $25k → 9%PRESUMPSCOT REGIONAL LAND TRUST: $25k → 7%MOUNT GRACE LAND CONSERVATION TRUST: $25k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

ME
VT
NH
MT
NY
MA
CT
RI
NC
DC

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 23% of Fields Pond Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 94% of the giving stays in MA; read by stated purpose it is 72% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Fields Pond Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 16% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$1.5M · 42 repeat orgs$994k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +60% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.

42 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

42
75

Total granted

$1.5M
$851k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+60%
+28%

Still filing today

93%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $143k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureHealthOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • ESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $155k · revenue +148%
  • HC
    HARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST
    4× · 2020–2024 · $100k · revenue +338%
  • MG
    MOUNT GRACE LAND CONSERVATION TRUST
    4× · 2021–2024 · $55k · revenue +84%

Funded once

  • NC
    NORTH COUNTY LAND TRUST INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +143%
  • PR
    Presumpscot Regional Land Trust
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +14%
  • MM
    MOOSE MOUNTAINS REGIONAL GREENWAYS
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +13%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Massachusetts Land Conservation Trust

Conservation and preservation of land.

Environment
2
Brewster Conservation Trust

Land conservation

Environment
3
Aspetuck Land Trust

Founded in 1966, Aspetuck Land Trust is a non-profit membership ogranization whose mission is to protect land forever and connect people to the natural world.

Environment
4
Sebasticook Regional Land Trust

The mission of the SRLT is to recognize and conserve the rich wild and workinglandscape of Central Maine's Sebasticook River watershed through conservation,stewardship and education. Our focal programs are land conservation for…

Environment
5
Lakes Region Conservation Trust

The mission of the Organization is the conservation of the natural resources of the Lakes Region of New Hampshire, the preservation of wildlife habitat, the stewardship of lands that define the character of the region and its quality of…

Environment
6
Redding Land Trust Inc

The primary mission of Redding Land Trust is to preserve the natural resources of the Town of Redding, CT and to promote the scientific and educational study of local and natural resources, and to acquire, by gift or purchase, land or…

Environment
7
Alford Land Trust Inc

Open Space Preservation

Environment
8
Massachusetts Outdoor Heritage Foundation Inc Attn Susan Sacco
—
9
Nashoba Conservation Trust

Acquire, preserve and maintain natural resources and wildlife habitat areas (land conservation).

Environment
10
Farmington Land Trust

The Farmington Land Trust Inc protects open space in the town of Farmington CT through the acquisition of open space, stewardship of acquired land, education of the public about the importance of open space and advocacy that ensures…

Environment
11
Rehoboth Land Trust

Preserves the natural beauty & resources of rehoboth, ma through conservation and ownership. maintains trails and hosts educational programming about wildlife and plants to encourage public appreciation and stewardship of our natural…

Environment
12
Princeton Land Trust

The princeton land trust was formed to preserve the natural beauty and rural character of the town of princeton.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wildlands Trust Inc and the most unlike its peers is Friends of Hope Cemetery & Woods. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 38 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%4%5–10yr19%9%10–20yr16%29%20–35yr13%38%35–55yr16%20%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%3%5–10yr19%5%10–20yr16%23%20–35yr13%34%35–55yr16%35%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/114
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,451

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

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

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 110 of the 131 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
46
Early backer (in before they grew)
109/110
Grantees still filing
78/110
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION — $155,000 · EnvironmentESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATIONHARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST — $100,000 · EnvironmentHARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST+83 more — $1,542,060 · Environment+83 moreKESTREL LAND TRUST — $60,000 · OtherKESTREL LAND TRUSTSOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF NH FORESTS — $40,000 · OtherSOCIETY FOR THE PROTECT…STOW CONSERVATION TRUST INC — $32,000 · OtherSTOW CONSERVATION TRUST…THE WESTERLY LAND TRUST — $25,000 · OtherPresumpscot Regional Land Trust — $25,000 · OtherTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND PORTLAND OFFIC — $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $20,000 · Other+24 more — $262,015 · Other+24 moreMaine Farmland Trust — $40,000 · Food & NutritionCOMMUNITY HARVEST PROJECT INC — $15,000 · Food & NutritionUPPER SACO VALLEY LAND TRUST — $10,000 · Food & NutritionGREENAGERS INC — $6,000 · Food & NutritionCHAMPLAIN AREA TRAILS INC — $25,000 · Recreation & SportsNATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION — $15,000 · Recreation & SportsFRIENDS OF HOPE CEMETERY & WOODS — $5,000 · Recreation & SportsVERMONT HUTS ASSOCIATION LTD — $5,000 · Recreation & SportsMt Ascutney Outdoors Inc — $5,000 · Recreation & SportsBOSTON FARMS COMMUNITY LAND TRUST INC — $15,000 · Community ImprovementGroundwork Lawrence Inc — $15,000 · Community ImprovementTAMWORTH COMMUNITY NURSE ASSOCIATION INC — $12,500 · HealthADIRONDACK ARCHITECTURAL HERITAGE INC — $5,500 · Arts & CultureHIRUNDO WILDLIFE TRUST — $2,000 · Animals
Environment$1,797,060Other$514,015Food & Nutrition$71,000Recreation & Sports$55,000Community Improvement$30,000Health$12,500Arts & Culture$5,500Animals$2,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetESSEX COUNTY GREENBELT ASSOCIATION — $155,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetHARWICH CONSERVATION TRUST — $100,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetMOUNT GRACE LAND CONSERVATION TRUST — $55,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetCoastal Rivers Conservation Trust — $50,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetBERKSHIRE NATURAL RESOURCES COUNCIL INC — $50,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetAppalachian Mountain Club — $47,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC — $45,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetORLEANS CONSERVATION TRUST — $45,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetMidcoast Conservancy — $45,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetScarborough Land Conservation Trust — $43,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetBLUE HILL HERITAGE TRUST — $42,000 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetMaine Farmland Trust — $40,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS — $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWESTPORT LAND CONSERVATION TRUST INC — $35,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetBULL CREEK COMMON LANDS — $35,000 over 2y, 7.7% of budgetNASHUA RIVER WATERSHED ASSOC INC — $35,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetROYAL RIVER CONSERVATION TRUST — $35,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetPutney Mountain Association Incorporated — $32,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetSTOW CONSERVATION TRUST INC — $32,000 over 3y, 23% of budgetGREEN MOUNTAIN CONSERVANCY INCORPORATED — $30,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetSUDBURY VALLEY TRUSTEES INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetAUSBON SARGENT LAND PRESERVATION TRUST — $30,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetVERMONT YOUTH CONSERVATION CORPS INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS LAND TRUST COALITION — $26,300 over 3y, 6.4% of budgetTHE WESTERLY LAND TRUST — $25,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCHAMPLAIN AREA TRAILS INC — $25,000 over 2y, 3.7% of budgetNORTH COUNTY LAND TRUST INC — $25,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetPresumpscot Regional Land Trust — $25,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetMOOSE MOUNTAINS REGIONAL GREENWAYS — $25,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetGROTON OPEN SPACE ASSOCIATION INC — $20,000 over 2y, 6.8% of budgetAVALONIA LAND CONSERVANCY INC — $20,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetGeorges River Land Trust — $20,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetNeponset River Watershed Association — $20,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetRANGELEY LAKES HERITAGE TRUST INC — $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetEAST QUABBIN LAND TRUST INC — $20,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetGREATER LOVELL LAND TRUST INC — $20,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetForest Society of Maine — $20,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetNORTHERN CONNECTICUT LAND TRUST INC — $17,500 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC — $17,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBARNSTABLE LAND TRUST INC — $17,500 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBOSTON FARMS COMMUNITY LAND TRUST INC — $15,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND — $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAGRICULTURAL STEWARDSHIP ASSN INC — $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMaine Appalachian Trail Land Trust — $15,000 over 1y, 9.8% of budgetTHE GREEN MOUNTAIN CLUB INC DEBONIS — $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetBUZZARDS BAY COALITION — $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGroundwork Lawrence Inc — $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHARVARD CONSERVATION TRUST — $15,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Davis Conservation Fo…Bafflin FoundationThe Nature ConservancyFidelity FoundationWilliam P Wharton Tru…Maine Community Found…Onion FoundationJohn Sage FoundationIbm International Fou…Open Space Institute …Momentum ConservationEdward C Johnson Fund
Davis Conservation FoundationME89.9× affinity42 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Davis Conservation Foundation · Bafflin Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Fidelity Foundation · William P Wharton Trust UW Art 2(D) · Maine Community Foundation Inc · Onion Foundation · John Sage Foundation · Ibm International Foundation · Open Space Institute Land Trust Inc · Momentum Conservation · Edward C Johnson Fund

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Fields Pond Foundation Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 190%2%8%17%30%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 10%
  • Nashua River Watershed Assoc Inc — 54% of income from government
  • Groton Open Space Association Inc — 50% of income from government
  • Green Mountain Conservancy Incorporated — 49% of income from government
  • Windmill Hill Pinnacle Association — 47% of income from government
  • Vermont Youth Conservation Corps Inc — 47% of income from government
  • Putney Mountain Association Incorporated — 44% of income from government
  • Vermont Land Trust Inc — 42% of income from government
  • Buzzards Bay Coalition — 37% of income from government
  • Wareham Land Trust Inc — 27% of income from government
  • Avalonia Land Conservancy Inc — 21% of income from government
  • Steep Rock Association Inc — 19% of income from government
  • Community Harvest Project Inc — 18% of income from government
  • The Green Mountain Club Inc Debonis — 17% of income from government
  • Manomet Inc — 12% of income from government
  • Sudbury Valley Trustees Inc — 11% of income from government
  • Catamount Trail Association — 10% of income from government
  • East Quabbin Land Trust Inc — 9% of income from government
  • Neponset River Watershed Association — 8% of income from government
  • Essex County Greenbelt Association — 8% of income from government
  • Greenagers Inc — 7% of income from government
  • Wildlands Trust Inc — 5% of income from government
  • Barnstable Land Trust Inc — 4% of income from government
  • Bull Creek Common Lands — 4% of income from government
  • Grow Native Massachusetts Inc — 3% of income from government
  • Northeast Wilderness Trust Corporation — 2% of income from government
  • Orleans Conservation Trust — 2% of income from government
  • The Trustees of Reservations — 2% of income from government
  • Berkshire Natural Resources Council Inc — 1% of income from government
  • Appalachian Mountain Club — 1% of income from government
  • Massachusetts Audubon Society Inc — 1% of income from government
  • Massachusetts Rivers Alliance Inc — 1% of income from government
  • Harvard Conservation Trust — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
19get no government money at all
29report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Fields Pond Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Fields Pond Foundation Inc 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 131 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines