How much did JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY grant in FY2023?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 64% of JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

becauseuasfilmreliefmeetingstoriesshc

2020

usshjfadvance militaryconnectedmarfanvascularthird sector

2021

bring remarkablemeaningdifferencehamptonbooksamateur sportssports athletic

2022

hebcacbergamot quartetafroembry-riddlebarryruralfinancing

2023

brandeisuncfcellranks bentleyend hivumkchcv

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2023 · 746 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

Under $10k46 grants · $328k
$10k–50k208 grants · $5.1M
$50k–250k249 grants · $32M
$250k+243 grants · $367M

$110,254

Median grant

States reached

$20.2B

Total assets

Largest grants

LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION$23,713,066
SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE$22,507,780
WESTAT CORP$13,892,132
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO$11,269,912
UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF NEW HAMPSHIRE$9,595,647
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND$9,053,720
RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE$8,628,468
SAVE THE CHILDREN$8,416,297
AEROJET ROCKETDYNE INC$7,156,521
FAMILY HEALTH INTERNATIONAL$6,745,857
OCEUS NETWORKS LLC$6,390,979
UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA$5,872,227
LAKENHEATH ELECTRONICS DESIGN$5,765,777
PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY$5,027,798
EMORY UNIVERSITY$3,856,738

02The need

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–22, $1.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 10%. 54% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$2.1B · 1050 repeat orgs$65M to everyone else

1050 repeat relationships — 594 still active in FY2023, 456 since wound down; 143 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

1050

427

Total granted

$2.1B

$45M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%

+34%

Still filing today

38%

34%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthEducationScience & TechHuman ServicesInternationalCommunity ImprovementOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

SAVE THE CHILDREN
6× · 2018–2023 · $61M · revenue +21%
SR
SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE
6× · 2018–2023 · $54M · revenue +57%
RT
RESEARCH TRIANGLE INSTITUTE
6× · 2018–2023 · $41M · revenue +45%

Funded once

EH
ENGENDER HEALTH
one grant, 2018 · $2.0M · revenue -28%
HR
HAWAII RESOURCE GROUP LLC
one grant, 2022 · $1.4M
TB
TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING INC
one grant, 2020 · $1.4M

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

Philadelphia University

To improve lives and provide students with exceptional value in 21st century professional education.

Education

Washington University Medical Center

To provide and assist its member organizations in providing hospital facilities, physical properties, and programs appropriate for the care and treatment of patients, for the continued on Schedule O

—

Upmc

Support of subsidiary tax-exempt healthcare, education and research organizations

Health

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

The howard hughes medical institute is a philanthropy that serves society through the direct conduct of biomedical research and support for programs in science education.

Health

Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science

To improve the wellness of all people through innovative, interprofessional education of health and biomedical professionals and the discovery and implementation of knowledge.

—

Harvard Medical Faculty Physicians At

As previously noted in this form 990, the mission of harvard medical faculty physicians at beth israel deaconess medical center, inc. is to provide extraordinary healthcare services, where the patient comes first, supported by world-class…

Health

University of Chicago Medical Center

Our mission is to provide superior health care in a compassionate manner, ever mindful of each patient's dignity and individuality. to accomplish our mission, we call upon the skills and expertise of all who work together to advance…

Health

Tufts Medical Center Physicians

The tufts medical center physicians organization, inc. coordinates the administrative and billing activities for the group practices in their mission of providing quality health care services to patients of tufts medical center, inc. and…

Health

Institute for Biomedical Sciences

Research and development with goal of defining a microvascular index for non-invasive monitoring of vascular health and for early diagnosis of vascular related diseases. stem cell differentiation study to optimize selection of scaffolds,…

Health

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

Vanderbilt University Medical Center ("VUMC") is one of the nation's longest serving and most prestigious academic medical centers. Through its historic bond with Vanderbilt University, VUMC cultivates distinguished research and…

Health

San Diego Biomedical Research Institute

The SDBRI mission is to find new ways to predict and prevent cancer, diabetes, autoimmune disease, neurological disorders and HIV infection, and to accelerate medical advances that maintain health and improve quality of life.

Health

Hudson-Alpha Institute for

The primary mission of the institute will be to use the increasingly powerful research tools being developed in the biotechnology area to better understand the causes of certain diseases and to apply the findings of such research to help…

Science & Tech

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Jude Children's Research Hospital and the most unlike its peers is Elite Detection K9. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 43 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.6% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.6%9/1,587

the rest of the field

11%

206,158/1,817,978

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

630 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

611/630

Grantees still filing

479/630

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$1,396,521,614Education$279,449,110Health$180,656,243Science & Tech$130,485,262International$106,125,316Arts & Culture$26,738,645Social Science$21,763,034

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Trustees of Columbia UniversityNY76.9× affinity86 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Trustees of Columbia University · Trustees of Boston University · Cornell University · University of Pittsburgh · Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center · The George Washington University · Yale University · The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia · Vanderbilt University Medical Center · Emory University · Northwestern University · Brown University

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organisation JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

2get no government money at all

1rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: UNIVERSITY OF OREGON HEALTH SCIENCES DEPT OF ANESTHESIAS.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

high risk

~1 months of operating runway; revenue held over 5 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

5 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 510151916 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on UNIVERSITY OF OREGON HEALTH SCIENCES DEPT OF ANESTHESIAS, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 1 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue held over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 92% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Johns Hopkins University?

Find your warmest path to Johns Hopkins University through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

630 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Johns Hopkins University?

More from the funding graph

JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

630 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Johns Hopkins University?

More from the funding graph