Skip to content
J R Albert Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

J R Albert 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.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
52
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$4.6MEnvironment$936kYouth Development$803kCommunity Improvement$565kHuman Services$562kCivil Rights$444kEmployment$350kHealth$350kOther$0
02FY2025 · 52 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k17 grants · $43k
  • $10k–50k20 grants · $478k
  • $50k–250k15 grants · $930k
$30,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$44M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
A RED CIRCLE$100,000
STAR FARM$75,000
ADVOCATES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE$75,000
ACRES$75,000
URBAN INITIATIVES$75,000
KANSAS CITY BLACK URBAN GROWERS$70,000
HEALTHY SCHOOLS CAMPAIGN$60,000
SPRINGFIELD COMMUNITY GARDENS$50,000
CITY GREENS MARKET$50,000
MISSOURI RURAL CRISIS CENTER$50,000
GROWING HOME$50,000
CENTRAL MISSOURI COMMUNITY ACTION$50,000
FAITH IN PLACE$50,000
COLUMBIA CENTER FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE$50,000
KANBE'S MARKETS$50,000
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY19–25, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 86% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NATIONAL ANGELS: $8k → 10%KC HEALTHY KIDS: $30k → 16%ASIAN AMERICAN ADVANCING JUSTICE - ATLANTA: $15k → 9%HESED HOUSE: $5k → 8%KC HEALTHY KIDS: $30k → 16%WALKER FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%KC HEALTHY KIDS: $30k → 16%HESED HOUSE: $5k → 8%KC HEALTHY KIDS: $25k → 16%KC HEALTHY KIDS: $25k → 16%HESED HOUSE: $3k → 8%CROSS-LINES COMMUNITY OUTREACH: $10k → 16%NAPERVILLE SENIORS IN ACTION: $3k → 7%UNBOUND: $1k → 16%UNBOUND: $1k → 16%LOAVES AND FISHES: $30k → 7%LOAVES & FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES: $25k → 7%LOAVES AND FISHES: $25k → 7%SOCIALWORKS: $10k → 14%LOAVES & FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES: $25k → 7%NAPERVILLE SENIORS IN ACTION: $5k → 7%CONCORDIA PLACE: $15k → 14%CONCORDIA PLACE: $15k → 14%UPLIFT ORGANIZATION: $2k → 15%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $3k → 7%CONCORDIA PLACE: $15k → 14%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $3k → 7%CONCORDIA PLACE: $15k → 14%UPLIFT ORGANIZATION: $1k → 15%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $3k → 7%360 YOUTH SERVICES: $3k → 7%URBAN INITIATIVES INC: $100k → 14%UPLIFT ORGANIZATION INC: $1k → 15%URBAN INITIATIVES INC: $100k → 14%COMMUNITY SERVICES LEAGUE: $15k → 15%URBAN INITIATIVES: $100k → 14%URBAN INITIATIVES INC: $100k → 14%COMMUNITY SERVICES LEAGUE: $15k → 15%URBAN INITIATIVES INC: $100k → 14%URBAN INITIATIVES INC: $100k → 14%COMMUNITY SERVICES LEAGUE: $15k → 15%URBAN INITIATIVES: $75k → 14%NEW MOMS: $1k → 14%COMMUNITY SERVICES LEAGUE: $15k → 15%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
SD
CT
CA
CO
MO
MD
KS
TN
NC
DC
HI
MS
GA
TX
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.
$9.0M · 70 repeat orgs$824k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +53% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

70 repeat relationships: 36 still active in FY2025, 34 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

70
51

Total granted

$9.0M
$661k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+53%
+12%

Still filing today

81%
78%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $163k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Food & NutritionHuman ServicesEnvironmentAnimalsHealthYouth 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

  • UI
    URBAN INITIATIVES INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $675k · revenue +100%
  • CM
    CENTRAL MISSOURI COMMUNITY ACTION
    7× · 2019–2025 · $564k · revenue +64%
  • AF
    ADVOCATES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE NFP
    7× · 2019–2025 · $425k · revenue +217%

Funded once

  • AMERICARES FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $75k · revenue +35%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $75k · revenue +13%
  • NN
    National Network of Abortion Funds
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -22%
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
The Food Bank for Central & Northeast Missouri

The food bank for central & northeast missouri is a regional disaster and hunger relief network that acquires and distributes millions of meals each year to help neighbors get the food they need to thrive. (continued on schedule o)the…

Food & Nutrition
2
Central Illinois Foodbank Inc

The Foodbank's mission is to provide food, and develop awareness of and creative solutions for food insecurity. Annually, the Foodbank distributes approximately 9.5 million pounds of food to 130 food pantries, soup kitchens, children's…

Food & Nutrition
3
NourishMKE Inc

We're a network of community food centers that specializes in food, love, and community. Hunger is a real problem, and access to food should be a fundamental right. No one should be made to feel they're not deserving of nourishment when…

Food & Nutrition
4
Nashville Food Project Inc

The nashville food project brings people together to grow, cook, and share nourishing food, with the goals of cultivating community and alleviating hunger in our city.

Food & Nutrition
5
Fair Food Network Inc

Fair food network is organized to grow community health, wealth, and resilience through food, to increase access to affordable healthy food, help local food economies thrive and build resilience in local food and agriculture systems.

Food & Nutrition
6
Nourishing Hope

Nourishing hope provides food, mental health support, and social services to help all our neighbors thrive.

—
7
Food Connect Co

At food connect, we're dedicated to bridging the gaps in our food system, working to end hunger and fostering healthier communities through our innovative initiatives and programs. we build scalable technologies that support last-mile…

Food & Nutrition
8
Mill City Farmers Market Inc

Mission: to inspire and nurture a healthy community by building a local, sustainable, and organic food economy in a vibrant experiential marketplace.vision: to be a nationally recognized marketplace model that connects, educates, and…

—
9
Food Action

Our mission is to educate, organize and advocate for food and farming systems to become economically prosperous, ecologically sound and socially equitable.

—
10
Dc Greens Inc

DC Greens advances health equity by building a just and resilient food system.

Community Improvement
11
Feeding Illinois

Feeding illinois is a coalition of eight feeding america food banks that provide food to over 2,400 food pantries, soup kitchens, and shelters that feed nearly 1.4 million residents across the entire state of illinois.

Food & Nutrition
12
Kansas Foodbank Warehouse Inc

To feed the hungry by soliciting and receiving food and other goods from local, regional and national food companies and other enterprises

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Harvesters - the Community Food Network; the most unlike its peers is Naperville Seniors in Action. 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

110 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. 110 of the 137 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)
30
Early backer (in before they grew)
110/110
Grantees still filing
76/110
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ADVOCATES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE NFP: $425,000 · Food & NutritionADVOCATES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE NFPKansas City Black Urban Growers Inc: $281,500 · Food & NutritionKansas City Black Urban Growers IncKANBE'S MARKETS: $228,000 · Food & NutritionKANBE'S MARKETSCITY GREENS MARKET INC: $225,000 · Food & NutritionCITY GREENS MARKET INCGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $215,000 · Food & NutritionGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORYOZARKS FOOD HARVEST INC: $215,000 · Food & NutritionOZARKS FOOD HARVEST INCSOUTHEAST MISSOURI FOOD BANK INC: $215,000 · Food & NutritionSOUTHEAST MISSOURI FOOD BANK INCSPRINGFIELD COMMUNITY GARDENS: $200,482 · Food & NutritionSPRINGFIELD COMMUNITY GARDENSURBAN GROWERS COLLECTIVE INC: $200,000 · Food & NutritionURBAN GROWERS COLLECTIVE INCILLINOIS STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCE: $200,000 · Food & NutritionILLINOIS STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCECULTIVATE KANSAS CITY INC: $190,000 · Food & NutritionCULTIVATE KANSAS CITY INCURBAN HARVEST STL: $143,000 · Food & Nutrition+14 more: $407,000 · Food & Nutrition+14 moreCENTRAL MISSOURI COMMUNITY ACTION: $564,050 · OtherCENTRAL MISSOURI COMMUNITY ACTIONSTAR FARM: $250,000 · OtherSTAR FARMMissouri Rural Crisis Center: $200,500 · OtherMissouri Rural Crisis CenterHUNGER TASK FORCE INC: $190,000 · OtherHUNGER TASK FORCE INCIndividual grant recipient: $165,000 · OtherSTART EARLY: $150,000 · OtherAFTER THE HARVEST: $143,318 · OtherEARTH DANCE FARMS: $141,200 · OtherINSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL AND TRADE PRACTICES (IATP): $140,000 · OtherACRES: $125,000 · OtherTHE MESOTHELIOMA APPLIED RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $126,000 · Other+67 more: $1,186,516 · Other+67 moreHealthy Schools Campaign: $502,099 · EnvironmentHealthy School…Columbia Center for Urban Agriculture: $350,218 · EnvironmentColumbia Cente…CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $190,000 · EnvironmentCHICAGO HORTIC…SEED ST LOUIS: $50,000 · EnvironmentSEVEN GENERATIONS AHEAD: $50,000 · EnvironmentDENVER URBAN GARDENS: $50,000 · Environment+4 more: $40,500 · EnvironmentURBAN INITIATIVES INC: $675,000 · Human ServicesURBAN INITIAT…KC Healthy Kids: $140,000 · Human ServicesKC Healthy Ki…LOAVES & FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES: $105,000 · Human ServicesLOAVES & FISH…Community Services League of Jackson County: $60,000 · Human ServicesCONCORDIA PLACE: $60,000 · Human Services+12 more: $94,000 · Human Services+12 moreA RED CIRCLE: $350,000 · Education+2 more: $14,000 · EducationGROWING HOME INC: $350,000 · EmploymentFAITH IN PLACE: $257,647 · ReligionTHE REFORMATION PROJECT INC: $10,000 · Religion
Food & Nutrition$3,144,982Other$3,381,584Environment$1,232,817Human Services$1,134,000Education$364,000Employment$350,000Religion$267,647

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 budgetURBAN INITIATIVES INC: $675,000 over 7y, 2.5% of budgetCENTRAL MISSOURI COMMUNITY ACTION: $564,050 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetHealthy Schools Campaign: $502,099 over 7y, 3.5% of budgetADVOCATES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE NFP: $425,000 over 7y, 19% of budgetColumbia Center for Urban Agriculture: $350,218 over 7y, 6.5% of budgetA RED CIRCLE: $350,000 over 5y, 8.9% of budgetGROWING HOME INC: $350,000 over 7y, 2.4% of budgetKansas City Black Urban Growers Inc: $281,500 over 4y, 90% of budgetFAITH IN PLACE: $257,647 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetKANBE'S MARKETS: $228,000 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetCITY GREENS MARKET INC: $225,000 over 6y, 8.8% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $215,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetOZARKS FOOD HARVEST INC: $215,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHEAST MISSOURI FOOD BANK INC: $215,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetMissouri Rural Crisis Center: $200,500 over 5y, 2.5% of budgetSPRINGFIELD COMMUNITY GARDENS: $200,482 over 4y, 3.4% of budgetURBAN GROWERS COLLECTIVE INC: $200,000 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetILLINOIS STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCE: $200,000 over 7y, 4.7% of budgetHUNGER TASK FORCE INC: $190,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetCULTIVATE KANSAS CITY INC: $190,000 over 7y, 2.9% of budgetCHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY: $190,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetSTART EARLY: $150,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetAFTER THE HARVEST: $143,318 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetURBAN HARVEST STL: $143,000 over 5y, 7.0% of budgetKC Healthy Kids: $140,000 over 5y, 3.1% of budgetTHE MESOTHELIOMA APPLIED RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $126,000 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY RESPONSE: $107,986 over 2y, 16% of budgetLOAVES & FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES: $105,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBRIDGE COMMUNITIES INC: $92,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHEYENNE RIVER YOUTH PROJECT INC: $60,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE & TRADE POLICY: $60,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCommunity Services League of Jackson County: $60,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCONCORDIA PLACE: $60,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCHICAGO'S GREEN CITY MARKET PROGRAM: $55,000 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetSEED ST LOUIS: $50,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetSEVEN GENERATIONS AHEAD: $50,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetDENVER URBAN GARDENS: $50,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetFORGOTTEN HARVEST INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budget5 LOAVES FOOD PANTRY: $45,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetSTW CHARITIES INC: $35,000 over 3y, 8.5% of budgetTHE SEXUAL TRAUMA AND ABUSE CARE CENTER INC: $30,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetURBAN PRODUCE PUSH: $30,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetNational Network of Abortion Funds: $25,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetPlanned Parenthood Great Rivers-Missouri: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHISPANICS IN PHILANTHROPY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $25,000 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.

  • Who funds URBAN INITIATIVES INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL MISSOURI COMMUNITY ACTION ↗
  • Who funds Healthy Schools Campaign ↗
  • Who funds ADVOCATES FOR URBAN AGRICULTURE NFP ↗
  • Who funds Columbia Center for Urban Agriculture ↗
  • Who funds A RED CIRCLE ↗
  • Who funds GROWING HOME INC ↗
  • Who funds Kansas City Black Urban Growers Inc ↗
  • Who funds FAITH IN PLACE ↗
  • Who funds KANBE'S MARKETS ↗
  • Who funds CITY GREENS MARKET INC ↗
  • Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
  • Who funds OZARKS FOOD HARVEST INC ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST MISSOURI FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds Missouri Rural Crisis Center ↗
  • Who funds SPRINGFIELD COMMUNITY GARDENS ↗
  • Who funds URBAN GROWERS COLLECTIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds ILLINOIS STEWARDSHIP ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER TASK FORCE INC ↗
  • Who funds CULTIVATE KANSAS CITY INC ↗
  • Who funds CHICAGO HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds START EARLY ↗
  • Who funds AFTER THE HARVEST ↗
  • Who funds URBAN HARVEST STL ↗
  • Who funds KC Healthy Kids ↗
  • Who funds THE MESOTHELIOMA APPLIED RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY RESPONSE ↗
  • Who funds LOAVES & FISHES COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds BRIDGE COMMUNITIES INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds CHEYENNE RIVER YOUTH PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR AGRICULTURE & TRADE POLICY ↗
  • Who funds Community Services League of Jackson County ↗

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.

Greater Kansas City C…Health Forward Founda…United Way of Greater…Commerce Bancshares F…Ewing Marion Kauffman…Menorah Heritage Foun…Oppenstein Brothers F…The Shumaker Family F…Trio Foundation of St…The Lumpkin Family Fo…Kansas Health Foundat…The Sunderland Founda…
Greater Kansas City Community FoundationMO41× affinity26 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Health Forward Foundation · United Way of Greater Kansas City Inc · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation · Menorah Heritage Foundation · Oppenstein Brothers Foundation · The Shumaker Family Foundation · Trio Foundation of St Louis · The Lumpkin Family Foundation · Kansas Health Foundation · The Sunderland 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 J R Albert Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from J R Albert Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 21%
  • Oregon Food Bank: 21% of income from government
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
32report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to J R Albert Foundation?

Find your warmest path to J R Albert 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.

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 137 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 J R Albert’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