Skip to content

· Private foundation

Joanne Aldrich Graham & Kenneth R G 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.

$34k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$183kPhilanthropy$81kEducation$44kInternational$27kFood & Nutrition$23kHealth$15kYouth Development$14kPublic Safety & Disaster$9kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$654k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
1ST PREBYTERIAN CHURCH OF JOLIET$8,000
KNOX PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$8,000
PENN STATE UNIVERSITY$7,000
FEED MY STARVING CHILDREN$4,000
DKT INTERNATIONAL$3,000
ALICIA'S HOUSE FOOD PANTRY$3,000
UNITED WE DREAM$500
CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS$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 (FY22–24, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 17% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CRISIS CENTER INC: $1k → 15%MORNINGSTAR MISSION MINISTRIES: $5k → 7%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

VT
ID
IL
WI
NY
OR
IN
PA
CT
RI
VA
MD
TN
DC
GA
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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$262k · 17 repeat orgs$150k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +14% since the first grant, against +10% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
28

Total granted

$262k
$146k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+10%

Still filing today

35%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalReligionHuman ServicesCivil RightsEducationYouth 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

  • AI
    AlongSideAsia Inc
    3× · 2017–2019 · $48k · revenue +14%
  • JM
    JANA MARIE FOUNDATION
    5× · 2017–2023 · $14k · revenue +222%
  • CI
    CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA
    3× · 2017–2019 · $9k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • VC
    VANGUARD CHARITABLE DONOR ADVISED
    one grant, 2021 · $80k
  • ME
    MISSION EURASIAgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +160%
  • AR
    AMERICAN RED CROSS
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
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
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
2
World Vision Inc

World vision, inc. is a christian humanitarian organization dedicated to working with children, families, and their communities worldwide to reach their full potential by tackling the causes of poverty and injustice. (continued on schedule…

International
3
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
4
Corus International Inc

TO MANAGE AN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH, AND RELIEF FOCUSED FAMILY OF ORGANIZATIONS HELPING PEOPLE AND COMMUNITIES LIFT THEMSELVES OUT OF POVERTY, SUPPORT WELL-BEING OF INDIVIDUALS, FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES, AND PROVIDE…

Human Services
5
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
6
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
7
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
8
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
9
Counterpart International Inc

For over 60 years, counterpart international has partnered with communities worldwide to turn local ideas into lasting solutions, connecting local vision with global opportunity. (continued on schedule o)we believe people closest to the…

International
10
World Coffee Research

World coffee research unites the global coffee industry to drive science-based agricultural solutions to urgently secure a diverse and sustainable supply of quality coffee today and for generations to come. our mission is to grow, protect,…

International
11
Waterorg

Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.

International
12
Internet Society Foundation

At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Feed My Starving Children Inc; the most unlike its peers is AlongSideAsia 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

18 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. 18 of the 47 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)
17/18
Grantees still filing
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VANGUARD CHARITABLE DONOR ADVISED: $80,000 · OtherVANGUARD CHARITABLE DONOR ADVISEDKNOX PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $59,000 · OtherKNOX PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHAlongSideAsia Inc: $48,000 · OtherAlongSideAsia IncPENN STATE UNIVERSITY: $30,500 · OtherPENN STATE UNIVERSITY1ST PREBYTERIAN CHURCH OF JOLIET: $18,575 · Other1ST PREBYTERIAN CHURCH OF JOLIETSUMMITT CHAPEL UNITED METHODIST: $18,000 · Other1ST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF JOLIET: $13,400 · OtherALICIA'S HOUSE FOOD PANTRY: $12,000 · Other+27 more: $68,675 · Other+27 moreDKT INTERNATIONAL INC: $9,000 · InternationalCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $9,000 · InternationalSave The Children Federation Inc: $5,000 · InternationalFEED MY STARVING CHILDREN INC: $4,000 · InternationalJANA MARIE FOUNDATION: $14,000 · Youth DevelopmentMISSION EURASIA: $8,000 · ReligionInterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA: $3,000 · ReligionMORNING STAR MISSION MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesCRISIS CENTER INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesPurdue Research Foundation: $2,500 · EducationJUNIATA COLLEGE: $1,000 · EducationWESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY: $3,000 · Environment
Other$348,150International$27,000Youth Development$14,000Religion$11,000Human Services$6,000Education$3,500Environment$3,000

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 budgetAlongSideAsia Inc: $48,000 over 3y, 7.1% of budgetJANA MARIE FOUNDATION: $14,000 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetDKT INTERNATIONAL INC: $9,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $9,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMISSION EURASIA: $8,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMORNING STAR MISSION MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFEED MY STARVING CHILDREN INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetInterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPurdue Research Foundation: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCRISIS CENTER INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJUNIATA COLLEGE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE AOPA FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 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 AlongSideAsia Inc ↗
  • Who funds JANA MARIE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DKT INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA ↗
  • Who funds MISSION EURASIA ↗
  • Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
  • Who funds MORNING STAR MISSION MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds FEED MY STARVING CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA ↗
  • Who funds Purdue Research Foundation ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
  • Who funds CRISIS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds JUNIATA COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds THE AOPA FOUNDATION INC ↗

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.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA9.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · 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 Joanne Aldrich Graham & Kenneth R G Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joanne Aldrich Graham & Kenneth R G Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
  • Western Rivers Conservancy: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 47 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 Joanne Aldrich Graham & Kenneth R G’s filings →

More from the funding graph