· Private foundation
Marvin & Betty Borman Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 46% of MARVIN & BETTY BORMAN FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k4 grants · $150k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $334k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ANTIDEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION | $140,816 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC | $97,439 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTHERN CALIFORNIA | $96,228 |
| BIONIC PROJECT INC | $40,000 |
| GIFFORDS LAW CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE | $40,000 |
| BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY | $40,000 |
| JUST THE PILL | $30,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
6 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $211k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- PPPLANNED PARENTHOOD LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC3× · 2022–2024 · $287k · revenue +4%
- PPPlanned Parenthood Shasta-Diablo Inc3× · 2022–2024 · $286k · revenue +32%
- PPPLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES2× · 2022–2023 · $190k · revenue +15%
Funded once
- OJOUR JUSTICEone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +13%
ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICEone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -24%- EMEastern Massachusetts Abortion Fundgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +103%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The minnesota business partnership's mission is to maintain a high quality of life for all minnesotans by ensuring that the state's economy remains strong, globally competitive and its prospects for growth bright by working with elected…
To build and maintain financial support for planned parenthood north central states to advance and protect sexual and reproductive health care for all.
To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.
Ppmw provides high-quality, compassionate healthcare, including reproductive care; promote sexual health; and advocate for reproductive rights and health equity for all.
Planned Parenthood of Montana empowers all people to make informed decisions and ensures the freedom to manage their own sexuality, and personal health by providing the highest quality confidential healthcare services, education, and…
To encourage, promote, support, and elect pro-choice women of all political parties to all levels of public office in minnesota.
MCF is a vibrant philanthropic community connecting, strengthening and mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity and equity.
To provide exceptional reproductive and complementary health care services, honest education, and advocacy for all.
The minnesota chamber of commerce proactively leads the business community statewide to: advance pro-business, responsible minnesota public policy that creates jobs and grows the econony; provde member services to address evolving business…
National public radio, inc. ("npr") works collaboratively with member public radio station licensees ("member stations") to create a more informed public, one that is challenged and invigorated by a deeper understanding and appreciation of…
Creating powerful advocacy to enhance economic vitality in the minneapolis-st. paul region.
To develop and sustain a constituency that uses the political process to guarantee women the right to make personal decisions regarding the full range of reproductive choices.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood North Central States and the most unlike its peers is Eastern Massachusetts Abortion Fund. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 21 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD LEAGUE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood Shasta-Diablo Inc ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD NORTH CENTRAL STATES ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds BIONIC PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds OUR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Eastern Massachusetts Abortion Fund ↗
- Who funds BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds GIFFORDS LAW CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE ↗
- Who funds JTP PROFESSIONAL SERVICE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds NORTHSIDE ACHIEVEMENT ZONE ↗
- Who funds MINNEAPOLIS SOCIETY OF FINE ARTS DBA MINNEAPOLIS INSTITUTE OF ARTS ↗
- Who funds Bridge the Gap College Prep ↗
- Who funds MINNESOTA ORCHESTRAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WALKER ART CENTER ↗
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.
Open a dossier: National Network of Abortion Funds Inc · Hopewell Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 organization Marvin & Betty Borman Foundation 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.
- Brandeis University — 9% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts Inc — 3% of income from government
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 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Marvin & Betty Borman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Marvin & Betty Borman 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.