Skip to content
James Douglas Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

James Douglas 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.

$8k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2023.

Arts & Culture$16kHuman Services$8kEducation$3kFood & Nutrition$1kSocial Science$1kYouth Development$198
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$7,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$92k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CG JUNG INSTITUTE OF NEW YORK INC$7,500
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 (FY19–19, $198) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SISTER TO SISTER OF MONTCLAIR MENTORING GROUP INCO: $198 → 16%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.

26%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10k · 3 repeat orgs$28k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +394% since the first grant, against -39% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 0 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

3
6

Total granted

$10k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+394%
-39%

Still filing today

67%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
EducationYouth DevelopmentFood & NutritionPublic BenefitHuman ServicesSocial ScienceOther
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

  • MA
    MONTCLAIR AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2022 · $4k · revenue +394%
  • NA
    NEVER ALONE AGAIN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ORGANIZATION R
    2× · 2019–2020 · $3k
  • SF
    SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    2× · 2021–2023 · $2k · revenue -35%

Funded once

  • AI
    ALJIRA INC
    one grant, 2018 · $12k · revenue -92%
  • Jack and Jill of America Foundation Incgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +139%
  • GB
    Give Back a New Jersey Non Profit Corp Zetlin & DeChiara LLP
    one grant, 2018 · $1k · revenue -95%
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
Cg Jung Study Center

To train psychotherapists and other students to become jungian analysts by providing them with advanced analytical training via program focused on teachings of c.g. jung. we encourage individual research and publication on all aspects of…

Social Science
2
Cg Jung Institute of New England Inc

Professional training and seminars to further contributions to the growth of knowledge in the field of analytical psychology.

Social Science
3
C J Jung Center

Non-profit provides therapy sessions and resources to individuals and groups seeking assistance with psychological health productivity and well being.

Health
4
The Ji Ji Foundation
Human Services
5
Freud Foundation Us
Arts & Culture
6
Ajj Scholarship Fund Incorporated
Education
7
The Jir Foundation
Philanthropy
8
University of Judaism Foundation
—
9
Cg Jung Institute of Los Angeles

The organization's mission is to promote the concepts and discoveries of c.g. jung.

—
10
Chicago Society of Jungian Analysts Dba Cg Jung Institute of Chicago

to advance Analytical Psychology through training analysts, teaching clinicians, and engaging diverse communities to foster personal transformation and social renewal.

—
11
The J Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Sigma Pi Phi Fraternity Scholarship & Development Foundation of Jacksonvill

To provide scholarships for college students

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cg Jung Foundation for Analytical Psychology Inc; the most unlike its peers is Cg Jung Institute of New York 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

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 10 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
3/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ALJIRA INC: $12,000 · OtherALJIRA INCCG JUNG INSTITUTE OF NEW YORK INC: $7,500 · OtherCG JUNG INSTITUTE OF NEW YORK INCNEVER ALONE AGAIN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ORGANIZATION R: $3,223 · OtherNEVER ALONE AGAIN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ORGANIZATION RJack and Jill of America Foundation Inc: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentJack and Jill o…MONTCLAIR AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $4,310 · Public BenefitMONTCLAIR AFR…SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 · EducationSAN FRANC…CG JUNG FOUNDATION FOR ANALYTICAL PSYCHOLOGY INC: $1,000 · EducationCG JUNG F…Give Back a New Jersey Non Profit Corp Zetlin & DeChiara LLP: $1,000 · Food & NutritionPHILEMON FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Social ScienceSISTER TO SISTER OF MONTCLAIR MENTORING GROUP INC: $198 · Human Services
Other$22,723Youth Development$5,000Public Benefit$4,310Education$3,000Food & Nutrition$1,000Social Science$1,000Human Services$198

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetALJIRA INC: $12,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetCG JUNG INSTITUTE OF NEW YORK INC: $7,500 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetJack and Jill of America Foundation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMONTCLAIR AFRICAN AMERICAN HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $4,310 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGive Back a New Jersey Non Profit Corp Zetlin & DeChiara LLP: $1,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetPHILEMON FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCG JUNG FOUNDATION FOR ANALYTICAL PSYCHOLOGY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Donor Advised Charita…
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 James Douglas Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James Douglas Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 James Douglas Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to James Douglas Family 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 10 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 James Douglas Family’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