Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Private foundation

Merck Family Fund

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$3.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
87
Grants FY2024still arriving
15
States reached
$130k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
0197% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.

Environment$9.5MFood & Nutrition$2.3MPublic Benefit$1.5MCommunity Improvement$1.0MHuman Services$890kPhilanthropy$859kCrime & Legal$672kYouth Development$554kOther$0
02FY2024 · 87 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k57 grants · $1.7M
  • $50k–250k26 grants · $1.5M
$35,000
Median grant
15
States reached
$64M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TIDES FOUNDATION$130,000
CLEAN ENERGY GROUP INC$80,000
ACADIA CENTER$75,000
NEW YORK LAWYERS FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST$75,000
PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA$70,000
DOGWOOD ALLIANCE$60,000
FARM SCHOOL NYC$60,000
Individual grant recipient$50,000
SOUTHERN COALITION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE$50,000
MAKE THE ROAD PA$50,000
SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER$50,000
NEW ENGLAND GRASSROOTS ENVIRONMENT FUND$50,000
EL PUEBLO$50,000
POWER$50,000
UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS$50,000
02The need
03

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 (FY19–24, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 85% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SOUTHEAST ASIAN COALITION OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS: $15k → 11%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER: $30k → 20%SOUTHEAST ASIAN COALITION OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS: $15k → 11%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC: $30k → 20%SOUTHEAST ASIAN COALITION OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS: $15k → 11%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC: $30k → 20%SOUTHEAST ASIAN COALITION OF CENTRAL MASS INC: $15k → 11%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER: $25k → 20%SOUTHEAST ASIAN COALITION OF CENTRAL MASSACHUSETTS: $15k → 11%THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC: $25k → 20%BED-STUY CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER: $25k → 20%EL PUEBLO: $50k → 8%EL PUEBLO: $50k → 8%EL PUEBLO: $50k → 8%EL PUEBLO: $25k → 8%GREEN CITY FORCE: $35k → 20%GREEN CITY FORCE: $30k → 20%RISEBORO COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP: $30k → 20%GREEN CITY FORCE: $25k → 20%GREEN CITY FORCE: $25k → 20%GREEN CITY FORCE: $25k → 20%RISEBORO COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP: $25k → 20%GREEN CITY FORCE: $25k → 20%RISEBORO COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP: $20k → 20%RISEBORO COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP INC: $20k → 20%RISEBORO COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP: $20k → 20%RISEBORO COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP: $20k → 20%RED HOOK INITIATIVE: $30k → 20%RED HOOK INITIATIVE: $30k → 20%RED HOOK INITIATIVE: $25k → 20%RED HOOK INITIATIVE: $25k → 20%RED HOOK INITIATIVE: $25k → 20%UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS: $50k → 20%UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS: $50k → 20%UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS INC: $50k → 20%UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS: $50k → 20%UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS: $50k → 20%UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS: $50k → 20%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

ME
VT
NH
WA
WI
NY
MA
OR
PA
RI
CA
CO
VA
MD
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
LA
GA
FL

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.

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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$17M · 108 repeat orgs$2.1M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +66% since the first grant, against +49% for the ones you funded once.

108 repeat relationships — 64 still active in FY2024, 44 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

108
62

Total granted

$17M
$1.8M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+66%
+49%

Still filing today

79%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $311k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementEducationHuman ServicesCivil RightsOther

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

  • SA
    SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY
    6× · 2019–2024 · $550k · revenue +105%
  • AC
    Acadia Center
    5× · 2019–2024 · $476k · revenue +101%
  • NE
    NORTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIPS
    6× · 2019–2024 · $407k · revenue +66%

Funded once

  • Rocky Mountain Institutegraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $85k · revenue +183%
  • NI
    NICHOLAS INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2019 · $75k
  • DUKE UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $75k · revenue +49%

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.

1
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
2
Coalition for Green Capital D/B/a American Green Bank Consortium

Cgc operates as a nonprofit financial institution that invests directly and through partners to transform financial markets by using public and private investing to accelerate the deployment of projects that strengthen the grid, reduce…

Environment
3
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
4
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
5
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
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
Greenlight Action

Greenlight action mobilizes grassroots power to get more clean energy projects built more quickly across the united states.

Environment
8
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
9
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
10
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
11
E3G Third Generation Environmentalism

E3g is a leading international not-for-profit think tank specialising in climate diplomacy harnessing expertise in the politics and economics of climate change.

Environment
12
Climate Leadership Council Inc

To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Groundwork Usa Inc and the most unlike its peers is Transitcenter Inc. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyAffordable Housing Developm…Policy Research and AdvocacyLocal Food System Organizat…Immigrant Worker SupportCommunity Arts CentersCommunity Food PantriesChild Abuse Advocacy Servic…Food Banks and PantriesCommunity FoundationsFaith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Environmental Conservation …
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 30 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%4%<5yr14%10%5–10yr19%17%10–20yr16%25%20–35yr13%31%35–55yr16%13%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%3%<5yr14%9%5–10yr19%13%10–20yr16%21%20–35yr13%42%35–55yr16%13%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%3/136
the rest of the field
13%
240,393/1,819,429

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.

04the grantee network

135 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. 135 of the 187 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
48
Early backer (in before they grew)
132/135
Grantees still filing
98/135
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY — $550,000 · EnvironmentSOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGYAcadia Center — $475,667 · EnvironmentAcadia CenterNORTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIPS — $406,734 · EnvironmentNORTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIPSCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC — $396,156 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INCAMERICAN COUNCIL FOR AN ENERGY-EFFICIENT ECONOMY — $391,558 · EnvironmentAMERICAN COUNCIL FOR AN ENERGY-EFFICIENT…CERES INC — $375,000 · EnvironmentClean Energy Group Inc — $285,000 · EnvironmentSOUTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE — $270,000 · EnvironmentDogwood Alliance Inc — $255,000 · Environment+40 more — $3,658,605 · Environment+40 moreSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER — $750,000 · OtherSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTERNew York Lawyers for the Public Interest Inc — $350,000 · OtherTIDES FOUNDATION — $500,000 · OtherTIDES FOUNDATIONTHE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER — $305,000 · Other+85 more — $5,480,138 · Other+85 moreTHE URBAN FARMING INSTITUTE OF BOSTONINC — $212,500 · Community ImprovementTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC — $207,500 · Community ImprovementGroundwork Lawrence Inc — $200,000 · Community ImprovementGROUNDWORK SOMERVILLE INC — $170,000 · Community ImprovementNORRIS SQUARE NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECT — $139,000 · Community ImprovementEVERETT COMMUNITY GROWERS INC — $100,000 · Community ImprovementFRANKLIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $90,000 · Community ImprovementPHILADELPHIA CITY FUND INC — $58,000 · Community ImprovementBLACK FARMER FUND INC — $50,000 · Community ImprovementGROUNDWORK USA INC — $50,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY PARTNERS — $50,000 · Community ImprovementUNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS INC — $300,000 · Human ServicesEL PUEBLO INC — $175,000 · Human ServicesGREEN CITY FORCE INC — $165,000 · Human ServicesTHE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC — $165,000 · Human ServicesRED HOOK INITIATIVE — $135,000 · Human ServicesRISEBORO COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP INC — $135,000 · Human ServicesSOUTHEAST ASIAN COALITION OF CENTRAL MA — $75,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER — $48,000 · Human ServicesBLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINA — $287,500 · EducationNATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS — $190,000 · EducationNORTH CAROLINA BLACK ALLIANCE INC — $175,000 · EducationGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY — $115,000 · EducationDUKE UNIVERSITY — $75,000 · Education+5 more — $80,000 · EducationThe Food Project Inc — $190,000 · Food & NutritionEQUITY ADVOCATES INC — $157,000 · Food & NutritionURBAN CREATORS — $110,000 · Food & NutritionMILL CITY GROWS INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionSOUL FIRE FARM INSTITUTE INC — $100,000 · Food & NutritionROOTS RISING INC — $60,000 · Food & NutritionEASTIE FARM INC — $55,000 · Food & NutritionBREAD & ROSES INC — $50,000 · Food & Nutrition+5 more — $95,500 · Food & NutritionNational Vote At Home Institute — $250,000 · Civil RightsPENNSYLVANIA VOICE — $212,500 · Civil RightsORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC — $125,000 · Civil RightsFLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INC — $50,000 · Civil RightsTHE CHISHOLM LEGACY PROJECT INC — $40,000 · Civil RightsNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC — $39,000 · Civil RightsDemocracy North Carolina — $25,000 · Civil Rights
Environment$7,063,720Other$7,385,138Community Improvement$1,327,000Human Services$1,198,000Education$922,500Food & Nutrition$917,500Civil Rights$741,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER — $750,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetSOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY — $550,000 over 6y, 3.8% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $500,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetAcadia Center — $475,667 over 5y, 6.4% of budgetNORTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIPS — $406,734 over 6y, 2.1% of budgetCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC — $396,156 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetAMERICAN COUNCIL FOR AN ENERGY-EFFICIENT ECONOMY — $391,558 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetCERES INC — $375,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetNew York Lawyers for the Public Interest Inc — $350,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetTHE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER — $305,000 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetUNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS INC — $300,000 over 6y, 1.8% of budgetBLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINA — $287,500 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetClean Energy Group Inc — $285,000 over 6y, 4.5% of budgetSOUTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE — $270,000 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetDogwood Alliance Inc — $255,000 over 6y, 2.3% of budgetNational Vote At Home Institute — $250,000 over 5y, 8.3% of budgetREGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL INC — $215,000 over 6y, 3.6% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA VOICE — $212,500 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetTHE URBAN FARMING INSTITUTE OF BOSTONINC — $212,500 over 6y, 3.4% of budgetURBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK — $210,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC — $207,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGroundwork Lawrence Inc — $200,000 over 6y, 1.8% of budgetSOUTHERN COALITION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE — $200,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetAMERICAN RIVERS INC — $200,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD LAND POWER PROJECT — $200,000 over 6y, 11% of budgetGREEN GUERILLAS INC — $197,500 over 6y, 9.3% of budgetThe Food Project Inc — $190,000 over 6y, 2.0% of budgetNATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS — $190,000 over 5y, 2.4% of budgetCLEAN WATER FUND — $180,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetNatural Resources Council of Maine Inc — $180,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $175,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetEL PUEBLO INC — $175,000 over 4y, 5.7% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA BLACK ALLIANCE INC — $175,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC — $175,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetGROUNDWORK SOMERVILLE INC — $170,000 over 5y, 12% of budgetOUR CLIMATE EDUCATION FUND — $165,000 over 6y, 5.7% of budgetGREEN CITY FORCE INC — $165,000 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetTHE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HUNGER INC — $165,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetMAJORITYACTION — $165,000 over 4y, 7.3% of budgetNORTH STAR FUND INC — $165,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetSTAND — $160,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetEQUITY ADVOCATES INC — $157,000 over 5y, 19% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE — $155,000 over 5y, 2.0% of budgetTHE JOHN BARTRAM ASSOCIATION — $155,000 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT — $150,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetTHE PENNSYLVANIA HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY — $145,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGREENROOTS INC — $145,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC — $145,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budget
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 SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN ALLIANCE FOR CLEAN ENERGY ↗
  • Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Acadia Center ↗
  • Who funds NORTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIPS ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN COUNCIL FOR AN ENERGY-EFFICIENT ECONOMY ↗
  • Who funds CERES INC ↗
  • Who funds New York Lawyers for the Public Interest Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER ↗
  • Who funds UNITED COMMUNITY CENTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds BLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINA ↗
  • Who funds Clean Energy Group Inc ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds Dogwood Alliance Inc ↗
  • Who funds National Vote At Home Institute ↗
  • Who funds REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds PENNSYLVANIA VOICE ↗
  • Who funds THE URBAN FARMING INSTITUTE OF BOSTONINC ↗
  • Who funds URBAN SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTORS NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC ↗
  • Who funds Groundwork Lawrence Inc ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN COALITION FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
  • Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD LAND POWER PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds GREEN GUERILLAS INC ↗
  • Who funds The Food Project Inc ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS ↗
  • Who funds CLEAN WATER FUND ↗
  • Who funds Natural Resources Council of Maine Inc ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds EL PUEBLO INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTH CAROLINA BLACK ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds LAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC ↗

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.

United States Energy …Barr FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…The Energy FoundationFreedom Together Foun…Natural Resources Def…New Venture FundPatagoniaorgThe John Merck FundClif Family FoundationTides FoundationWindward Fund
United States Energy FoundationCA53.6× affinity27 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United States Energy Foundation · Barr Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Energy Foundation · Freedom Together Foundation · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · New Venture Fund · Patagoniaorg · The John Merck Fund · Clif Family Foundation · Tides Foundation · Windward Fund

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 Merck Family Fund 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 160%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Local Enterprise Assistance Fund — 100% of income from government
  • Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships — 100% of income from government
  • Franklin County Community Development Corporation — 22% of income from government
  • Foodcorps Inc — 21% of income from government
  • Eastie Farm Inc — 13% of income from government
  • Groundwork Somerville Inc — 12% of income from government
  • Brandeis University — 9% of income from government
  • Casa Inc — 8% of income from government
  • Mill City Grows Inc — 7% of income from government
  • Roots Rising Inc — 6% of income from government
  • Regional Environmental Council Inc — 6% of income from government
  • The Urban Farming Institute of Bostoninc — 4% of income from government
  • Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
  • Greenroots Inc — 1% of income from government
  • Springfield Partners for Community Action Inc — 0% of income from government
  • Ceres Inc — 0% of income from government
  • Philanthropy Massachusetts Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
16get no government money at all
27report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Merck Family Fund?

Find your warmest path to Merck Family Fund 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 187 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines