Skip to content
Jessica W Nagle Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Jessica W Nagle 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.

$61k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Recreation & Sports$80kHealth$55kEnvironment$40kInternational$30kYouth Development$15kArts & Culture$15kCivil Rights$10kAnimals$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $45k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HARLEM LACROSSE$25,000
FRIENDS OF THE HIGH LINE$10,000
AMFAR$10,000
BIG CAT VOICES$5,000
AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION$5,000
MALALA FUND$5,000
REPUPOSE WARDROBE STYLE FOR GOOD CONCEPTS INC$1,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 89% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE TREVOR PROJECT: $20k → 14%THE PINES FOUNDATION: $5k → 7%FRIENDS OF THE HIGH LINE: $10k → 17%MALALA FUND: $5k → 14%BIG CAT VOICES: $5k → 13%THE CHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $25k → 8%THE TREVOR PROJECT: $20k → 14%FRIENDS OF THE HIGH LINE: $5k → 17%AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%EMPOWERS AFRICA: $15k → 17%OCEAN CONSERVANCY: $5k → 14%EMPOWERS AFRICA: $15k → 17%OCEAN CONSERVANCY: $5k → 14%HARLEM LACROSSE: $25k → 17%HARLEM LACROSSE: $25k → 17%HARLEM LACROSSE: $25k → 17%HARLEM LACROSSE: $5k → 17%MEN HAVING BABIES: $10k → 17%AMFAR: $10k → 17%AMFAR: $5k → 17%REPUPOSE WARDROBE STYLE FOR GOOD CONCEPTS INC: $1k → 17%HARLEM RBI: $15k → 17%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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$190k · 6 repeat orgs$71k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +32% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
4

Total granted

$190k
$55k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
0%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $16k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Civil RightsPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsInternationalEnvironmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • HL
    HARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $80k · revenue +37%
  • TREVOR PROJECT INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $40k · revenue +32%
  • EA
    EMPOWERS AFRICA INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $30k · revenue +290%

Funded once

  • CL
    CHRIS LONG FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $25k · revenue 0%
  • HR
    HARLEM RBI INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +60%
  • MH
    MEN HAVING BABIES INC
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue 0%
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
The Population Council Inc

We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…

International
3
Parliamentarians for Global Action

Parliamentarians for global action (pga) is a non-partisan ngo network of legislators from all regions of the world acting in their individual capacity to advocate for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law; peace and human security;…

International
4
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
5
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
6
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
7
Arrow

To make grants to charitable organizations and programs that support the achievement of sexual and reproductive health (srh) of the poor & underprivileged women and others in the asia-pacific and elsewhere.

International
8
Movember Foundation

Please refer to schedule o

Health
9
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
10
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
11
For the Fishes

To address, educate, coordinate, and enhance enforcement capacity to end teh trade in coral reef wildlife for household and other small display aquariums. our supply and demand side strategies are directed locally and globally to…

Animals
12
Dazzle Africa

Dazzle africa's mission is to partner with local organizations to provide programs in conservation, education and community development. the organization aims to ensure that future generations are self-sufficient and iconic african…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Harlem Rbi Inc; the most unlike its peers is Men Having Babies 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

12 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. 12 of the 14 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
4/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATION: $80,000 · Recreation & SportsHARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP COR…TREVOR PROJECT INC: $40,000 · Civil RightsTREVOR PROJECT INCMEN HAVING BABIES INC: $10,000 · Civil RightsMEN HAVING BABIES INCCHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $25,000 · PhilanthropyCHRIS LONG FOUNDA…HARLEM RBI INC: $15,000 · PhilanthropyHARLEM RBI INCEMPOWERS AFRICA INC: $30,000 · InternationalEMPOWERS AFRI…FRIENDS OF THE HIGH LINE INC: $15,000 · Arts & CultureTHE FOUNDATION FOR AIDS RESEARCH: $15,000 · HealthOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $10,000 · EnvironmentBIG CAT VOICES INC: $5,000 · OtherBIG CAT V…REPUPOSE WARDROBE STYLE FOR GOOD CONCEPTS INC: $1,000 · OtherAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · OtherAFRICAN W…THE PINES FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · OtherTHE PINES…THE MALALA FUND: $5,000 · OtherTHE MALAL…
Recreation & Sports$80,000Civil Rights$50,000Philanthropy$40,000International$30,000Arts & Culture$15,000Health$15,000Environment$10,000Other$21,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHARLEM LACROSSE AND LEADERSHIP CORPORATION: $80,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEMPOWERS AFRICA INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCHRIS LONG FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE HIGH LINE INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR AIDS RESEARCH: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHARLEM RBI INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMEN HAVING BABIES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PINES FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE MALALA FUND: $5,000 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.

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.

National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Jessica W Nagle Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jessica W Nagle Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 14 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 Jessica W Nagle’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