Skip to content
Joseph C Grossman Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Joseph C Grossman Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$4k
Granted FY2026still arriving
2
Grants FY2026still arriving
1
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$22kHuman Services$15kEnvironment$14kEducation$7kCivil Rights$4kInternational$4kArts & Culture$2kPublic Safety & Disaster$2kOther$0
02FY2026 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,029
Median grant
1
States reached
$302k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Capital Trees$2,029
Temple Beth-EL$2,000
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 (FY19–24, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 85% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%American National Red Cross: $2k → 14%Full Circle Grief Center: $1k → 6%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $3k → 22%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $2k → 22%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

WA
NY
MA
CA
VA
MD
DC
HI
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.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$47k · 10 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +48% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2026, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
14

Total granted

$47k
$23k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+1%

Still filing today

70%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
Human ServicesEnvironmentInternationalHealthEducationCivil RightsOther
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

  • NT
    NATIONAL TROPICAL BOTANICAL GARDEN
    2× · 2017–2018 · $14k · revenue +174%
  • FH
    FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER
    4× · 2017–2021 · $8k · revenue +27%
  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF RICHMOND
    2× · 2019–2020 · $5k · revenue +105%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • AA
    ALOHA ANGELS FUND
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • FH
    Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
    one grant, 2023 · $4k · revenue +9%
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 Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
2
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
3
Northeast College of Health Sciences

Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.

Education
4
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
5
President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education
6
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
7
Arc Research Institute

Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.

Health
8
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
9
Children's Hospital

Organization's mission to improve health outcomes for children; be a leader in creating innovative solutions to pediatric healthcare problems; and excel in care, advocacy, research. as the nation's children's hospital, the mission of…

Health
10
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
11
The Mount Sinai Hospital

Mount sinai is committed to the advancement of the art and science of medicine through clinical excellence. the central mission consists of high-quality patient care and teaching conducted in an atmosphere of social concern and scholarly…

Health
12
Bridgton Hospital

To provide exceptional healthcare services in a safe and trustfulenvironment through the expertise, commitment, and compassion ofour family of caregivers.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; the most unlike its peers is Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center. 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

17 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 26 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/17
Grantees still filing
11/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $9,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODFRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $8,300 · OtherFRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientALOHA ANGELS FUND: $5,000 · OtherALOHA ANGELS FUNDTemple Beth-EL: $2,000 · OtherTemple Beth-ELNational Abortion Federation: $1,557 · OtherDOORWAYS FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIES INC: $1,500 · Other+6 more: $4,477 · Other+6 moreNATIONAL TROPICAL BOTANICAL GARDEN: $13,500 · EnvironmentNATIONAL TROPICAL BOTANIC…CAPITAL TREES: $3,018 · EnvironmentCAPITAL TREESJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF RICHMOND: $4,500 · Human ServicesJEWISH COM…American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,500 · Human ServicesAmerican N…FULL CIRCLE GRIEF CENTER: $1,033 · Human ServicesFULL CIRCL…Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center: $3,700 · HealthTHE MCSHIN FOUNDATION: $521 · HealthMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $3,000 · InternationalDOCTORS FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $510 · InternationalTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $2,169 · Civil RightsDONORSCHOOSEORG: $1,526 · EducationMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $500 · EducationBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER SAN DIEGO: $262 · Youth Development
Other$36,834Environment$16,518Human Services$7,033Health$4,221International$3,510Civil Rights$2,169Education$2,026Youth Development$262

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 budgetNATIONAL TROPICAL BOTANICAL GARDEN: $13,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER: $8,300 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF RICHMOND: $4,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFred Hutchinson Cancer Center: $3,700 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAPITAL TREES: $3,018 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $2,169 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDONORSCHOOSEORG: $1,526 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDOORWAYS FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIES INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFULL CIRCLE GRIEF CENTER: $1,033 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHAWAII PUBLIC RADIO: $900 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MCSHIN FOUNDATION: $521 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDOCTORS FOR GLOBAL HEALTH INC: $510 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER SAN DIEGO: $262 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDSAVERS- MEMORIAL CHILD GUIDANCE CLINIC: $200 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 Community Foundat…Carmax FoundationCharities Aid Foundat…National Philanthropi…Paypal Charitable Giv…Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Community Foundation IncVA13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Community Foundation Inc · Carmax Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 Joseph C Grossman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joseph C Grossman 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 35%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of 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
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Joseph C Grossman Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Joseph C Grossman Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 26 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Joseph C Grossman’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