· Private foundation
Harold and Colene Brown 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
- $50k–250k10 grants · $851k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $250,000 |
| RAND CORPORATION | $200,000 |
| SOUTHERN CA PUBLIC RADIO | $126,056 |
| OCCIDENTIAL COLLEGE | $100,000 |
| ARLINGTON GARDEN OF PASADENA | $100,000 |
| PRX | $75,000 |
| POLYTECHNIC SCHOOL | $50,000 |
| GREATER WASHINGTON EDUCATIONAL TELECOMM ASSOC | $50,000 |
| LIBRARY FOUNDATION OF LOS ANGELES | $50,000 |
| BROOKLYN PUBLIC LIBRARY | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| NEW YORK UNIVERSITY | $25,000 |
| MINGEI INTERNATIONAL MUSEUM | $25,000 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 84% 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 +35% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
31 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
- CICALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY9× · 2017–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +35%
The Rand Corporation8× · 2017–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +34%- OCOCCIDENTAL COLLEGE5× · 2021–2025 · $541k · revenue +53%
Funded once
- PRPARDEE RAND GRADUATE SCHOOLone grant, 2019 · $100k
- USUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $56k · revenue +28%
Metropolitan Opera Association Incone grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +3%
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.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
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…
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…
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…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
See schedule ovision: the cooper union for the advancement of science and art is dedicated to peter cooper's radical commitment to diversity and his founding vision that fair access to an inspiring free education and forums for courageous…
Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Trustees of Princeton University and the most unlike its peers is Scripps Health. 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 55 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 50 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
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 CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ↗
- Who funds The Rand Corporation ↗
- Who funds OCCIDENTAL COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN PUBLIC LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds POLYTECHNIC SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds THE LIBRARY FOUNDATION OF LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds PASADENA EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR STRATEGIC AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES ↗
- Who funds CRISTO REY NEW YORK HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds BRIC ARTS MEDIA BKLYN INC ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Metropolitan Opera Association Inc ↗
- Who funds PASADENA ART ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds SCRIPPS HEALTH ↗
- Who funds MADISON SQUARE PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds PREP FOR PREP ↗
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: The Ayco Charitable Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Harold and Colene Brown Family 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- American Academy of Arts & Sciences — 3% 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.