Skip to content

· Private foundation

Iron Mountain Charitable Foundation Inc

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.

$160k
Granted FY2023
3
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$100k
Largest
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 2023.

Public Safety & Disaster$1.3MHealth$431kInternational$205kEducation$80kPhilanthropy$54kPublic Benefit$50kEmployment$39kHuman Services$1kOther$0
02FY2023 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
$50,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$4.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNICEF$100,000
INSTITUTE OF POLITICS POLICY AND HISTORY$50,000
MENTAL HEALTH LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE$10,000
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.

US giving: 76% of grant dollars ($1.6M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 24% that went abroad ($517k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–17, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%American Red Cross: $33k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
AZ
TN
NC
SC
DC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL

Beyond the US: 24% of all-years giving ($517k)

9 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
India$172k · 1143 grants
Indonesia$115k · 347 grants
Malaysia$83k · 186 grants
Singapore$40k · 32 grants
Peru$39k · 195 grants
Mexico$37k · 91 grants
Brazil$30k · 114 grants
Canada$1k · 3 grants
Philippines$1k · 6 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 6% of Iron Mountain Charitable Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Iron Mountain Charitable Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 29% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its field
05the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 2,000 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
5/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RICHARD REESE EMPLOYEE RELIEF FUND INC: $560,000 · Public Safety & DisasterRICHARD REESE EMPLOYEE RELIEF FUND INCINTERNATION RESCUE COMMITTEE: $100,000 · OtherINTERNATION RESCUE COMMITTEEJOHN JAMISON EDUCATION FUND: $60,000 · OtherJOHN JAMISON EDUCATION FUNDCristo Rey Corporate Work Study Program: $39,000 · OtherCristo Rey Corporate Work Study ProgramCRISTO REY BOSTON CORPORATE: $36,000 · OtherCRISTO REY BOSTON CORPORATE+191 more: $324,426 · Other+191 moreUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $100,000 · InternationalINSTITUTE OF POLITICS POLICY AND HISTORY: $50,000 · EducationAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $32,819 · Human ServicesMENTAL HEALTH LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE INC: $10,000 · Health
Public Safety & Disaster$560,000Other$559,426International$100,000Education$50,000Human Services$32,819Health$10,000

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetRICHARD REESE EMPLOYEE RELIEF FUND INC: $560,000 over 3y, 75% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE OF POLITICS POLICY AND HISTORY: $50,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $32,819 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMENTAL HEALTH LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds RICHARD REESE EMPLOYEE RELIEF FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE OF POLITICS POLICY AND HISTORY ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds MENTAL HEALTH LEADERSHIP INITIATIVE INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Iron Mountain Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Iron Mountain Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Suffolk University: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Iron Mountain Charitable Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Iron Mountain Charitable Foundation Inc 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 2000 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Iron Mountain’s filings →

More from the funding graph