Skip to content
Gsr Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Gsr Fund

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.

$23k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$14k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Civil Rights$105kReligion$7kEnvironment$6kInternational$4kArts & Culture$2kRecreation & Sports$2kCrime & Legal$1kHealth$400Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $14k
$6,200
Median grant
2
States reached
$261k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE$14,000
FRIENDS OF ARAVA INSTITUTE$6,200
JEWISH NATIONAL FUND$2,360
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 93% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FRIENDS OF ARAVA INSTITUTE: $6k → 8%JEWISH NATIONAL FUND: $2k → 17%PHILBROOK MUSEUM OF ART: $250 → 15%Center for the Blind: $300 → 8%TEMPLE EMANUEL: $5k → 12%Junior League Las Vegas: $260 → 13%TEMPLE EMANUEL: $1k → 8%JEWISH NATIONAL FUND: $1k → 17%ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN CASA: $1k → 8%TEMPLE EMANUEL: $300 → 12%JEWISH NATIONAL FUND: $1k → 17%TEMPLE EMANUEL: $206 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $30k → 17%TEMPLE EMANUEL: $100 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $15k → 17%JEWISH COLORADO: $200 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $14k → 17%METRO DENVER PARTNERS: $200 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $13k → 17%MILE HIGH UNITED WAY: $25 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $12k → 17%ANCHOR CENTER FOR BLIND CHILDREN: $100 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $10k → 17%JUNIOR LEAGUE: $300 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $10k → 17%JUNIOR LEAGUE: $286 → 12%ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $1k → 17%JUNIOR LEAGUE: $260 → 12%JUNIOR LEAGUE: $260 → 12%JUNIOR LEAGUE: $260 → 12%JUNIOR LEAGUE: $260 → 12%JUNIOR LEAGUE: $108 → 12%DENVER ART MUSEUM: $150 → 12%DENVER ART MUSEUM: $150 → 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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$114k · 4 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
8

Total granted

$114k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+80%
+236%

Still filing today

50%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureCivil RightsYouth DevelopmentPhilanthropyEnvironmentHealthOther
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

  • AL
    ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE
    8× · 2018–2025 · $105k · revenue +80%
  • TE
    TEMPLE EMANUEL
    5× · 2017–2024 · $7k
  • JL
    JUNIOR LEAGUE
    7× · 2017–2024 · $2k

Funded once

  • DD
    DENVER DEBUTANTE BALLFINE ARTS FOUN
    one grant, 2018 · $2k
  • AF
    ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN CASA
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • CC
    COLORADO CENTER FOR THE BLINDgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $300 · revenue +636%
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
Denver Zoological Foundation

Inspiring communities to save wildlife for future generations.

Animals
2
The Contemporary Jewish Museum

The contemporary jewish museum (the cjm) makes the diversity of the jewish experience relevant for a twenty-first-century audience through innovative exhibitions and programs that educate, challenge, and inspire.

Arts & Culture
3
Tucson Jewish Community Center Inc

The mission of the tucson jewish community center (tucson j) is to cultivate and enrich jewish identity, ensure jewish continuity, foster wellness, and broaden communal harmony. the vision is to strive to be an outstanding jewish community…

Human Services
4
Dorot Foundation
Philanthropy
5
The Jewish Museum

The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.

Arts & Culture
6
Denver Film Society

The mission of the denver film society is to develop opportunities for diverse audiences to discover film through creative, thought-provoking experiences. we strive to cultivate and celebrate film as an art form; to enrich and expand the…

Arts & Culture
7
Yeshiva University

The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.

Education
8
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum

Chartered by a unanimous act of congress, the museum is america's national institution for the documentation, study, interpretation, and education of holocaust history and serves as our country's memorial to the victims of the holocaust.…

Arts & Culture
9
The Board of Jewish Education

To provide early childhood and jewish education to the community.

Education
10
Jewish Learning Venture

The mission of jewish learning venture is to inspire and empower those seeking to make jewish life, learning, and community relevant and meaningful, by providing 1)effective, cutting-edge, professional development and leadership training,…

Religion
11
Bender Jcc of Greater Washington

The bender jcc embraces and welcomes the diversity of our community and encourages everyone to seek meaning and fulfillment by participating in our rich programming inspired by our jewish heritage. we open our doors to everyone, including…

Human Services
12
The Young Men's and Young Women's Hebrew Association

For over 150 years, the 92nd street y, new york has been serving its communities and the larger world by bringing people together (continued on schedule o)and providing exceptional, groundbreaking programs in the performing and visual…

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mile High United Way Inc; the most unlike its peers is Colorado Center for the Blind. 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

11 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. 11 of the 15 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $105,400 · Civil RightsANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUETEMPLE EMANUEL: $6,723 · OtherTEMPLE EMA…JUNIOR LEAGUE: $1,734 · OtherJUNIOR LEA…DENVER DEBUTANTE BALLFINE ARTS FOUN: $1,500 · OtherDENVER DEB…ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN CASA: $1,300 · OtherADVOCATES …+4 more: $525 · OtherFRIENDS OF ARAVA THE INSTITUTE LTD: $6,200 · EnvironmentJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $4,360 · InternationalDENVER ART MUSEUM: $300 · Arts & CultureTHE PHILBROOK MUSEUM OF ART INC: $250 · Arts & CultureCOLORADO CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $300 · HealthJUNIOR LEAGUE OF LAS VEGAS: $260 · Community Improvement
Civil Rights$105,400Other$11,782Environment$6,200International$4,360Arts & Culture$550Health$300Community Improvement$260

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 budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $105,400 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF ARAVA THE INSTITUTE LTD: $6,200 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $4,360 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDENVER ART MUSEUM: $300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOLORADO CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJUNIOR LEAGUE OF LAS VEGAS: $260 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE PHILBROOK MUSEUM OF ART INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISHColorado: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDELTA GAMMA ANCHOR CENTER FOR BLIND CHILDREN: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMILE HIGH UNITED WAY INC: $25 over 1y, 0.0% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.2× affinity5 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 Gsr Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gsr Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 15 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 Gsr’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