Skip to content
Humanitas Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Humanitas Inc

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.

$52k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$11k
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Education$262kHuman Services$111kInternational$100kReligion$29kHousing & Shelter$26kHealth$14kEnvironment$13kYouth Development$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $31k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$18k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LOYOLA HOUSE JESUIT COMMUNITY AT USF$11,100
NORFIELD CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH$10,000
CATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT$10,000
CATHEDRAL SCHOOL FOR BOYS$5,000
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY$5,000
THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL$5,000
STAMFORD ALUMNI FOUNDATION INC$2,500
NORWALK HOUSING FOUNDATION$2,500
FILLING IN THE BLANKS$309
A BETTER CHANCE OF WILTON INC$250
RIDGEFIELD OPERATION FOR ANIMAL RESCUE$250
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 (FY22–25, $111k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LOVE THE NATIONS INC: $100k → 13%WILTON COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE FUND: $500 → 9%THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL: $5k → 9%THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL: $5k → 9%FILLING IN THE BLANKS: $309 → 9%THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL: $200 → 9%THE HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL: $100 → 9%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.

54%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$295k · 9 repeat orgs$247k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +15% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
12

Total granted

$295k
$235k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
0%

Still filing today

56%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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
HealthHuman ServicesEducationCommunity ImprovementEnvironmentYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • NH
    NORWALK HOUSING FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2021–2025 · $25k · revenue +15%
  • BN
    BREAKTHROUGH NEW YORK INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $10k · revenue +23%
  • RO
    Ridgefield Operation for Animal Rescue Inc
    4× · 2022–2025 · $1k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • LT
    Love the Nations Incgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +50%
  • MW
    Mali Wellness Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +25%
  • SI
    SOUNDWATERS INC
    one grant, 2021 · $8k · revenue -56%
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
Wilton Land Conservation Trust

Protecting, enhancing and conserving open spaces encompassing meadows, woodlands, wetlands, and waterways in the town of wilton ct.

Environment
2
Connecticut Cancer Foundation Inc

To provide funds to benefit families affected by cancer and to support cancer research and education.

—
3
Breast Cancer Network of Western New Yorkinc

Our mission is to support the well being of all western new yorkers impacted by breast cancer.

Health
4
Wilmette Community Nursery School

To provide high quality developmentally appropriate educational programs for young children and support for their families.

—
5
Wharton Business School Club of Ny Inc

The wharton club of new york is the networking, career guidance,educational and social forum for the 25,000 plus mba and undergraduatealumni of the wharton school of business to the university of pennsylvania, in the new york city…

Education
6
Washingtonville Housing Alliance

To preserve and enhance the quality of life in the village of mamaroneck and the surrounding area. wha constructs new housing and improves existing housing for low and moderate income residents and undertakes other supportive activities…

—
7
Loaves and Fishes New Haven Inc

Loaves and fishes shares god's love by providing food, clothing, and community to our neighbors in a safe and welcoming space. we advocate for a more equitable and just food system in greater new haven. we provide food, clothing and access…

Food & Nutrition
8
Wmc-New York Inc

Wmc new york, inc. shall at all times be operated exclusively for charitable, scientific, and educational purposes within the meaning of section 170(c)(2)(b) and 501(c)(3) of the code, and for the purpose of engaging in various activities…

Health
9
Wellfare Inc

Wellfare is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization based in new york city on a mission to solve food insecurity and transform the state of grocery and nutrition in low-income communities. the better box from wellfare is the first free food…

—
10
United Way of Windham County Inc

United way of windham county (uwcc) advances the common good by creating opportunities for a better way of life for all, focusing on education, income and health - the building blocks of a better quality of life.

Philanthropy
11
Long Island Community Hospital At Nyu Langone Health

The goals and objectives of the corporation are as follows:(a) to operate and maintain a nonsectarian, general hospital at one or more locations for the furnishing of inpatient, ambulatory, restorative, preventative and emergency medical…

—
12
Land Conservancy of Ridgefield Inc

The Land Conservancy of Ridgefield, Inc. ("the Land Conservancy"), founded in 1967, preserves and protects, for the general benefit of the public, Ridgefield, Connecticut's natural resources including land and water resources, the plant…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is A Better Chance of Wilton Inc; the most unlike its peers is Love the Nations 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

16 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. 16 of the 25 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)
16/16
Grantees still filing
10/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FAIRFIELD COLLEGE PREPARATORY SCHOOL: $181,000 · OtherFAIRFIELD COLLEGE PREPARATORY SCHOOLCATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT INC: $38,500 · OtherCATHOLIC ACADEMY OF BRIDGEPORT INCLOYOLA HOUSE JESUIT COMMUNITY AT USF: $18,599 · OtherLOYOLA HOUSE JESUIT COMMUNITY AT USFCATHEDRAL SCHOOL FOR BOYS: $10,000 · OtherNORFIELD CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH WESTON CT: $10,000 · Other+4 more: $13,000 · OtherLove the Nations Inc: $100,000 · Human ServicesLove the Nations IncHUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL INC: $10,300 · Human ServicesHUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL…+2 more: $809 · Human ServicesMali Wellness Foundation: $100,000 · HealthMali Wellness Foundati…THE MED13L FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · Health+2 more: $3,500 · HealthTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $15,000 · EducationBREAKTHROUGH NEW YORK INC: $10,000 · EducationANCHOR ACADEMY INC: $5,000 · Education+1 more: $750 · EducationNORWALK HOUSING FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · Community ImprovementSOUNDWATERS INC: $7,500 · EnvironmentWAKEMAN BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB CORP: $2,500 · Youth DevelopmentRidgefield Operation for Animal Rescue Inc: $1,000 · Animals
Other$271,099Human Services$111,109Health$108,500Education$30,750Community Improvement$25,000Environment$7,500Youth Development$2,500Animals$1,000

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 budgetLove the Nations Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetMali Wellness Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 5.7% of budgetNORWALK HOUSING FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL INC: $10,300 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH NEW YORK INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSOUNDWATERS INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetANCHOR ACADEMY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE MED13L FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetLIVFREE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetRidgefield Operation for Animal Rescue Inc: $1,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CANCER COUCH FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetA BETTER CHANCE OF WILTON INC: $750 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetWILTON COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE FUND INC: $500 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

The John and Ethel Ka…The Bank of America C…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
The John and Ethel Kashulon FoundationDE13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The John and Ethel Kashulon Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Humanitas Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Humanitas Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Human Services Council Inc: 27% of income from government
  • Wakeman Boys and Girls Club Corp: 11% of income from government
  • Soundwaters Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 25 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 Humanitas’ 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