Skip to content
Golub Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Golub Family 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.

$658k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

84% of Golub Family Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Brown University, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 6 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’21
8
’22
7
’23
3
’24
6
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$2.4MInternational$260kPhilanthropy$250kRecreation & Sports$45kHealth$5k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
  • $250k+2 grants · $500k
$25,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHARLOTTESVILLE AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$250,000
BROWN UNIVERSITY$250,000
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY$50,000
STANFORD UNIVERSITY$50,000
WASHINGTON & LEE UNIVERSITY$25,000
USA WATER POLO INC$15,000
ASANTE AFRICA FOUNDATION INC$10,000
MENLO SCHOOL$5,000
WOODSIDE SCHOOL FOUNDATION$2,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY22–22, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%TEAK FELLOWSHIP INC: $3k → 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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 6 repeat orgs$318k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +52% since the first grant, against -6% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
3

Total granted

$1.3M
$258k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+52%
-6%

Still filing today

83%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 44% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $60k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
EducationInternationalRecreation & SportsHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • Washington and Lee University
    5× · 2021–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +69%
  • MS
    MENLO SCHOOL
    4× · 2021–2025 · $54k · revenue +52%
  • UW
    USA WATER POLO INC
    4× · 2021–2025 · $45k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • MO
    MORASHA OLAMI INC
    one grant, 2023 · $250k · revenue -18%
  • CH
    CHILDREN'S HEALTH COUNCIL INC
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -6%
  • TT
    THE TEAK FELLOWSHIP INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +127%
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
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
2
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
3
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
4
Trustees of Dartmouth College

Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.

Education
5
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
6
Trustees of Tufts College

Education and Research

Education
7
President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education
8
Fordham University

Fordham university, the jesuit university of new york, is committed to the discovery of wisdom and the transmission of learning, through research and through education of the highest quality. for more information, see schedule o.

Education
9
Trustees of Clark University

Clark university's mission is to educate undergraduate and graduate students to be imaginative and contributing citizens of the world, and to advance the frontiers of knowledge and understanding through rigorous scholarship and creative…

Education
10
The Uc Davis Foundation

The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.

Education
11
Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

The trustees of the university of pennsylvania (the "university") sees itself as having a public service mission. in such regard, the university aims to provide a rich and diverse educational environment for its students; to pioneer…

Education
12
President-Board of Trustees Santa Clara College

Scu is a catholic and jesuit institution that makes student learning its central focus, promotes faculty and staff learning in its various forms, and exhibits organizational learning.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Menlo School; the most unlike its peers is Morasha Olami 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

13 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. 13 of the 14 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)
13/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Washington and Lee University: $1,115,000 · EducationWashington and Lee UniversityTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $150,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR…The Trustees of Princeton University: $50,000 · Education+2 more: $52,500 · EducationBROWN UNIVERSITY: $960,000 · Community ImprovementBROWN UNIVERSITYMORASHA OLAMI INC: $250,000 · InternationalMORASHA O…Asante Africa Foundation Inc: $10,000 · InternationalCHARLOTTESVILLE AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $250,000 · PhilanthropyCHARLOTTE…SACRED HEART SCHOOLS ATHERTON: $60,000 · OtherMENLO SCHOOL: $53,700 · OtherUSA WATER POLO INC: $45,000 · Recreation & SportsCHILDREN'S HEALTH COUNCIL INC: $5,000 · HealthTHE TEAK FELLOWSHIP INC: $2,500 · Human Services
Education$1,367,500Community Improvement$960,000International$260,000Philanthropy$250,000Other$113,700Recreation & Sports$45,000Health$5,000Human Services$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWashington and Lee University: $1,115,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetBROWN UNIVERSITY: $960,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMORASHA OLAMI INC: $250,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $150,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMENLO SCHOOL: $53,700 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetThe Trustees of Princeton University: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUSA WATER POLO INC: $45,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetWOODSIDE SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetChallenge Success: $22,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAsante Africa Foundation Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCHILDREN'S HEALTH COUNCIL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TEAK FELLOWSHIP INC: $2,500 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.

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.

Morgan Stanley Global…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Daffy Charitable FundNational Philanthropi…Silicon Valley Commun…The Blackbaud Giving …Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN14.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Daffy Charitable Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Golub Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Golub Family 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • The Trustees of Princeton University: 11% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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 Golub Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Golub Family 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 14 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 Golub Family’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