Skip to content

· Private foundation

Julian Lange Family Foundation II

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$155k
Granted FY2021
22
Grants FY2021
7
States reached
$70k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Health$245kEnvironment$106kFood & Nutrition$28kEducation$14kInternational$2kPublic Safety & Disaster$1kArts & Culture$1kHuman Services$1kOther$0
02FY2021 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k16 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $69k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $70k
$1,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$3.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CLEVELAND CLINIC$70,000
MATTHEW 25 MINISTRIES$21,000
OHIO ENV COUNCIL$16,000
NRDC$11,000
FOR LOVE OF CHILDREN$11,000
GLEN HELEN ASSOCIATION$10,000
MONADNOCK COMM HOSPITAL$5,000
MAYO CLINIC$4,000
FOODBANK$1,100
MONADNOCK CEN FOR HIST & CULTURE$1,000
MONADNOCK CONSERVANCY$1,000
PETERBOROUGH FIRE AND RESCUE$1,000
DAYTON HISTORY FUND$730
ETHEL WALKER SCHOOL$500
HAMS CENTER$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 (FY21–21, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%FOR LOVE OF CHILDREN: $11k → 14%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

NH
MN
NY
MA
OH
NJ
CT
DC
OK
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$333k · 13 repeat orgs$69k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +230% since the first grant, against +204% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2021, 1 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
8

Total granted

$333k
$34k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+230%
+204%

Still filing today

31%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21
EnvironmentEducationInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC
    4× · 2017–2021 · $42k · revenue +41%
  • GH
    GLEN HELEN ASSOCIATION
    2× · 2017–2021 · $10k · revenue +292%
  • TM
    The Monadnock Conservancy
    4× · 2017–2021 · $4k · revenue +230%

Funded once

  • AC
    ADHD CENTER CLEVELAND CLINIC
    one grant, 2017 · $29k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
  • JI
    JHAMTSE INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
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
Eastern National

Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.

Recreation & Sports
2
Nantucket Conservation Foundation Inc

The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…

Environment
3
Natural Areas Conservancy Inc

The natural areas conservancy champions urban natural areas in new york city and across the nation through innovative research, partnerships, and advocacy. we increase the health and resilience of urban forests and wetlands, catalyze…

Environment
4
The Land Trust for Tennessee Inc

To conserve the unique character of tennessee's natural and historic landscapes and sites for future generations.

Environment
5
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
6
Native Plant Trust Inc

The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.

Environment
7
Conservation Farms & Ranches

Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.

Housing & Shelter
8
The National Park Service Employee and Alumni Trust Fund

Foster, maintain and improve the morale of nps employees and to promote close ties with current nps members and nps alumni.

—
9
Fallbrook Land Conservancy

To acquire, protect, and manage open space in perpetuity for the benefit of wildlife and the community.

Environment
10
Amazon Conservation Association

Amazon conservation unites science, people, and innovation to protect the amazon - the greatest wild forest on earth. as guardians of the most iconic forest on the planet, we bring together the power of the latest science and technology…

Environment
11
Minnesota Land Trust

The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

Environment
12
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Parks Conservation Association; the most unlike its peers is Natural Resources Defense Council 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

8 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. 8 of the 31 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CLEVELAND CLINIC: $190,000 · OtherCLEVELAND CLINICOHIO ENV COUNCIL: $50,000 · OtherOHIO ENV COUNCILADHD CENTER CLEVELAND CLINIC: $28,500 · OtherADHD CENTER CLEVELAND CLINICMAYO CLINIC: $16,500 · Other+19 more: $27,297 · Other+19 moreNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $42,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURC…GLEN HELEN ASSOCIATION: $10,080 · EnvironmentGLEN HELEN ASSO…The Monadnock Conservancy: $3,500 · EnvironmentThe Monadnock C…+1 more: $50 · EnvironmentMatthew 25 Ministries Inc: $21,000 · InternationalFOR LOVE OF CHILDREN: $11,000 · Human ServicesETHEL WALKER SCHOOL INC: $1,100 · EducationFOLDS OF HONOR FOUNDATION: $200 · Education
Other$312,297Environment$55,630International$21,000Human Services$11,000Education$1,300

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $42,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMatthew 25 Ministries Inc: $21,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOR LOVE OF CHILDREN: $11,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGLEN HELEN ASSOCIATION: $10,080 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetThe Monadnock Conservancy: $3,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetETHEL WALKER SCHOOL INC: $1,100 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFOLDS OF HONOR FOUNDATION: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $50 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 NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds Matthew 25 Ministries Inc ↗
  • Who funds FOR LOVE OF CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds GLEN HELEN ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds The Monadnock Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds ETHEL WALKER SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds FOLDS OF HONOR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Julian Lange Family Foundation II funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Julian Lange Family Foundation II. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Julian Lange Family Foundation II?

    Find your warmest path to Julian Lange Family Foundation II 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 31 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Julian Lange Family Foundation II’s filings →

    More from the funding graph