Skip to content
John K and Aline L Goodman Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

John K and Aline L Goodman 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.

$36k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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, FY2020 to 2025.

Philanthropy$93kEducation$72kFood & Nutrition$8kCivil Rights$5kYouth Development$5kEnvironment$1kInternational$1kHuman Services$800Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
$12,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$401k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LOS CHARROS FOUNDATION$16,000
SAINT MICHAEL'S SCHOOL$12,000
PIMA COUNTY JUNIOR LIVESTOCK SALES$8,127
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 (FY20–20, $300) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%YOUTH ON THEIR OWN: $300 → 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.
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 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
Arizona-Sonora Desert Museum

We inspire people to live in harmony with the natural world by fostering love, appreciation, and understanding of the sonoran desert.

Arts & Culture
2
Arizona Antelope Foundation Inc

Conservation & Restoration of Antelope & their Habitat in Arizona. Conservation projects intended to protect, enhance, improve and connect viable & critical antelope habitat in Arizona

Animals
3
Arizona Latin-American Medical Association
Unclassified
4
Arizona Site Steward Program Foundation
Education
5
Arizona Wildlife Federation

Arizona Wildlife Federation's purpose is to promote and encourage the conservation, propagation, development and management of fish, game and other wildlife; to promote and encourage the wise use, conservation and restoration of waters,…

Animals
6
The Arizona Cattle Industry Research and Education Foundation

Livestock education and research in the cattle industry within Arizona.

—
7
Arizona Farm and Ranch Group

In collaboration with arizona's agricultural commodity groups, arizona farm and ranch group (afrg) will provide policy makers with up to date, applicable, and reliable information on critical issues facing the industry. in doing so, afrg…

Community Improvement
8
The Mountain Institute Inc

Advance the well- being of mountain people and conservation of mountain environments.

—
9
Arizona Community Foundation

To lead, serve and collaborate to mobilize enduring philanthropy for a better arizona.

Philanthropy
10
New Mexico Acequia Association

To protect new mexico's water and acequias, grow healthy food for local families and communities, and to honor new mexico's cultural heritage.

Environment
11
Arizona Association of Conservation Districts Inc

Arizona has multiple resource conservation districts to assist ranching and agricultural interests. This state association was formed to educate organize and coordinate the individual districts so that they can effectively utilize…

Environment
12
The Dons of Arizona
Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Land and Water Trust Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Amerind Foundation 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, 2017–2025.

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. 9 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LOS CHARROS FOUNDATION INC: $92,500 · PhilanthropyLOS CHARROS FOUNDATION INCSAINT MICHAEL'S SCHOOL: $42,000 · OtherSAINT MICHAEL'S SCHOOLTUCSON WALDORF SCHOOL: $30,000 · OtherTUCSON WALDORF SCHOOLPima County Junior Livestock Sales Inc: $8,127 · OtherPima County Junior Livestock Sales IncThe Amerind Foundation Inc: $5,000 · OtherThe Amerind Foundation Inc+3 more: $1,500 · OtherEL GRUPO YOUTH CYCLING: $4,962 · Recreation & SportsARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC: $1,000 · EnvironmentEmpire Ranch Foundation: $250 · EnvironmentMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $500 · InternationalMercy Corps: $500 · InternationalYOUTH ON THEIR OWN: $300 · Human Services
Philanthropy$92,500Other$86,627Recreation & Sports$4,962Environment$1,250International$1,000Human Services$300

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 budgetLOS CHARROS FOUNDATION INC: $92,500 over 5y, 15% of budgetThe Amerind Foundation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEL GRUPO YOUTH CYCLING: $4,962 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetARIZONA LAND AND WATER TRUST INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMercy Corps: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYOUTH ON THEIR OWN: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEmpire Ranch Foundation: $250 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

Community Foundation …Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation for Southern ArizonaAZ15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · 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 John K and Aline L Goodman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from John K and Aline L Goodman Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 47%
  • Mercy Corps: 47% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report 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.

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 John K and Aline L Goodman’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