· Private foundation
Grant Thornton Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $8k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $173k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| I GOT THIS FOUNDATION | $41,450 |
| ISRAAID | $29,205 |
| ALLEY-OOP KIDS | $27,745 |
| PALESTINE CHILDRENS'S RELIEF FUND (PCRF) | $26,556 |
| MBC TRAVELERS | $25,320 |
| ST JOHN'S UNIVERSITY | $12,800 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS | $10,000 |
| DISASTER RELIEF GRANT 1 | $5,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FOUNDATION | $1,650 |
| BARUCH COLLEGE | $1,575 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 88% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +38% for the ones you funded once.
185 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 181 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 12% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $160k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC3× · 2021–2023 · $300k · revenue +13%
- DUDEPAUL UNIVERSITY4× · 2017–2020 · $75k · revenue +25%
- DUDREXEL UNIVERSITY4× · 2017–2020 · $47k · revenue +10%
Funded once
- DRDisaster Relief Grants (4)one grant, 2018 · $128k
- WRWARRIOR REUNION FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $98k · revenue +3%
- DWDIGS WITH DIGNITY CORPORATIONgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $63k · revenue +32%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Trinity university is an independent co-educational university whose mission is excellence in the interrelated areas of teaching, research and services.
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
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.
Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…
Education and Research
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.
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…
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…
Depauw university develops leaders the world needs through an uncommon commitment to the liberal arts. depauw's diverse and inclusive learning and living experience, distinctive in its rigorous intellectual engagement and its global and…
At Roger Williams University, students are prepared to be thinkers and doers ready to solve challenging problems with innovative solutions. RWU offers robust offerings of undergraduate, graduate and professional programs across eight…
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of San Francisco and the most unlike its peers is Women in Training Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 71 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
205 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 205 of the 383 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Thurgood Marshall College Fund ↗
- Who funds WARRIOR REUNION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DEPAUL UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds DIGS WITH DIGNITY CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds University of Notre Dame du Lac ↗
- Who funds DREXEL UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds ST JOHN'S UNIVERSITY NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds John Carroll University ↗
- Who funds I Got This Foundation ↗
- Who funds WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds University of Dayton ↗
- Who funds University of Illinois Foundation ↗
- Who funds The Florida State University Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds University of Miami ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Ibm International Foundation · Kpmg US Foundation Inc · Ernst & Young Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · United Way Worldwide · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · National Collegiate Athletic Association · The Northrop Grumman Foundation · Deloitte Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc
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 Grant Thornton Foundation 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.
- University of Delaware — 25% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- The Trustees of the Stevens Institute of Technology — 12% of income from government
- Brandeis University — 8% of income from government
- University of Miami — 5% of income from government
- Northeastern University — 4% of income from government
- The University of Tulsa — 2% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 2% of income from government
- University of New Haven — 1% of income from government
- Jacksonville University — 1% of income from government
- Stetson University Inc — 1% of income from government
- Loyola University Maryland Inc — 1% of income from government
- Suffolk University — 1% of income from government
- Quinnipiac University — 0% of income from government
- Rollins College — 0% of income from government
- Oral Roberts University — 0% of income from government
- The University of Tampa Incorporated — 0% of income from government
- Eckerd College — 0% of income from government
- Oregon State University Foundation — 0% of income from government
- Bentley University — 0% of income from government
- University of Oregon Foundation — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Grant Thornton Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Grant Thornton 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.