Skip to content
Jorgensen Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Jorgensen Foundation

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$12k
Granted FY2020
12
Grants FY2020
8
States reached
$1k
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, FY2019 to 2020.

Human Services$24kHousing & Shelter$1k
02FY2020 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Epworth Children's Home$1,000
Hope Children's Home$1,000
Boys and Girls Home of North Caroli$1,000
Casa de Amparo$1,000
New Mexico Christian Children's Hom$1,000
Children's Services Auxiliary$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Real Life Children's Ranch$1,000
Eagle Ranch$1,000
Place of Hope$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Tennnyson Center for Children$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:

Its human-services grants (FY19–20, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Casa de Amparo: $1k → 11%New Mexico Christian Children's Hom: $1k → 18%Place of Hope: $1k → 11%Hope Children's Home: $1k → 13%Real Life Children's Ranch: $1k → 20%Coyote Hill Christian Children's Home: $1k → 17%Boys and Girls Home of North Carolina: $1k → 21%Casa de Amparo: $1k → 11%New Mexico Christian Children's Hone: $500 → 18%Hope Children's Home: $1k → 13%Real Life Children's Ranch: $1k → 20%Boys and Girls Home of North Caroli: $1k → 21%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

CA
CO
MO
NM
NC
SC
OK
GA
FL
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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$19k · 9 repeat orgs$6k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2020, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
3

Total granted

$19k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+1%
+159%

Still filing today

78%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20
Human ServicesHealthHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • CD
    Casa De Amparo
    2× · 2019–2020 · $2k · revenue +32%
  • EC
    EPWORTH CHILDREN'S HOME
    2× · 2019–2020 · $2k · revenue +42%
  • EAGLE RANCH INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $2k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • BF
    BROOKWOOD FLORIDA INC
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue -14%
  • CH
    Coyote Hill Foster Care Ministriesgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +159%
  • TC
    Tennyson Center for Children
    one grant, 2019 · $1k
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
Christian Home of Pecos

Christain Home

Crime & Legal
2
Sunny Glen Children's Home Inc

Sunny Glen Childrens Home, Inc. cares for children in need. Our care will be competent, compassionate and professional. We will help every child achieve their greatest potential-physically, emotionally, spiritually and academically.

Human Services
3
Bridge of Hope Ministries Inc

Provide safe & loving home for children

Human Services
4
Albuquerque Christian Children's Home Inc

The home provides care for children and wards of the court placed for foster home purposes.

Human Services
5
Covenant Children's Home Inc

Covenant childrens home is to provide a residence, food and clothing plus a continuum of care including physical, emotional, and spiritual nurturing for neglected, abandoned or abused children.

Human Services
6
Soaring Wings Ranch Inc

Soaring wings provides a christ-centered home for children while working with their families to overcome challenges they are facing for as long as needed.

Youth Development
7
New Beginnings Childrens Home

Provide a safe and therapeutic living environment for abused, neglected, and displaced children ages 5-17 by delivering services that transform lives and prepares for family reunification throught elements of love, hope and restoration.

Human Services
8
New Hope Childrens Ministries

The organization provides housing medical care education and loving support for homeless children in peru. the home is located in arequipa peru. the organization houses approximately 50 children and assists children no longer residing at…

International
9
Central Texas Children's Home

To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.

Human Services
10
House of Hope

Treating substance use disorders, rebuilding lives, strengthening families, and empowering women.

—
11
House of Hope Ministries

Provide a home for children who have been abandoned and abused.

International
12
La Paloma Family Services Inc

We build relationships that enhance the development of skills, foster a sense of worth and enhance a belief in each child's individual potential.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Mexico Christian Childrens Home; the most unlike its peers is Brookwood Florida 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

10 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. 10 of the 15 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Real Life Children's Ranch Inc: $2,000 · Human ServicesReal Life Children's Ranch IncCasa De Amparo: $2,000 · Human ServicesCasa De AmparoBOYS & GIRLS HOMES OF NC INC: $2,000 · Human ServicesBOYS & GIRLS HOMES OF NC INCEPWORTH CHILDREN'S HOME: $2,000 · Human ServicesEPWORTH CHILDREN'S HOMEHope International Ministries Inc: $2,000 · Human ServicesHope International Ministries IncNEW MEXICO CHRISTIAN CHILDRENS HOME: $1,500 · Human ServicesNEW MEXICO CHRISTIAN CHILDRENS HOMECoyote Hill Foster Care Ministries: $1,000 · Human ServicesCoyote Hill Foster Care MinistriesPLACE OF HOPE INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesPLACE OF HOPE INCChildren's Services Auxiliary: $3,000 · OtherChildren's Services AuxiliaryIndividual grant recipient: $2,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTennnyson Center for Children: $1,000 · OtherTennnyson Center for ChildrenIndividual grant recipient: $1,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTennyson Center for Children: $1,000 · OtherTennyson Center for ChildrenEAGLE RANCH INC: $2,000 · HealthEAGLE RAN…BROOKWOOD FLORIDA INC: $1,000 · Housing & Shelter
Human Services$13,500Other$8,500Health$2,000Housing & Shelter$1,000

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 budgetReal Life Children's Ranch Inc: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCasa De Amparo: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS HOMES OF NC INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEPWORTH CHILDREN'S HOME: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEAGLE RANCH INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHope International Ministries Inc: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEW MEXICO CHRISTIAN CHILDRENS HOME: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBROOKWOOD FLORIDA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCoyote Hill Foster Care Ministries: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLACE OF HOPE 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.

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.

The Blackbaud Giving …The Pfizer Foundation…The Bank of America C…Natl Christian Charit…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Blackbaud Giving FundSC13.3× affinity6 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Jorgensen Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jorgensen 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%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Brookwood Florida Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Real Life Children's Ranch Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Place of Hope Inc: 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 · 0–10%
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 15 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Jorgensen’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