· Private foundation
Nachman-Marks Foundation Trust Attn J Nachman
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 65% of NACHMAN-MARKS FOUNDATION TRUST ATTN J NACHMAN’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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONGREGATION BETH AHABAH | $5,730 |
| LEWIS GINTER BOTANTICAL GARDENS | $1,150 |
| ST JUDES CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION | $600 |
| FEEDMORE | $500 |
| VA LEAGUE FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $500 |
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF RICHMOND | $500 |
| MCSHIN FOUNDATION | $500 |
| MARINE TOYS FOR TOTS | $500 |
| SPECIAL OLYMPICS | $500 |
| GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND | $500 |
| MAKE A WISH | $500 |
| ROTARY ACTIVITES | $500 |
| HEALTH BRIGADE | $500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 68% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
53 repeat relationships — 36 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
- LGLEWIS GINTER BOTANICAL GARDEN INC8× · 2017–2025 · $15k · revenue +107%
- FMFEED MORE INC9× · 2017–2025 · $3k · revenue +59%
- VLVIRGINIA LEAGUE FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD INCORPORATED9× · 2017–2025 · $3k · revenue +110%
Funded once
- OHOPERATION HEALING FORCES INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +230%
- JCJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF RICHMONDone grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue +18%
- ALANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUEone grant, 2017 · $1k
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 mission is to bring compassion to health care and to be good to those in need, especially those who are poor and dying. as a system of caregivers, we commit ourselves to help bring people and communities to health and wholeness.
The university of virginia investment management company (uvimco) is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations (uaos).
The mission of the edward via college of osteopathic medicine (vcom) is to prepare globally-minded, community-focused physicians to meet the needs of rural and medically underserved populations and promote research to improve human health.
Collaborating with our members and stakeholders, vhha works to ensure the sustainability of virginia's health care system and improve the health of all virginians.
Acrp promotes excellence in clinical research. we support clinical research professionals through training and development, the exchange of ideas and expertise, and certification. we serve as the preferred source for quality tools,…
Chamberrva is the trusted voice for modern business in the richmond virginia region. we are change agents, rallying to do the hard things that will create a more connected, prosperous, health and equitable community.
To provide investment and investment management and related services to the rector and the board of visitors of virginia commonwealth university (vcu), and/or to the private and independent foundations and other entities affiliated with…
To create and sustain a dynamic and innovative physician community for the benefit of the greater richmond area.
To provide administrative services to university of virginia (university) entities, university associated organizations, or other entities involved in activities which support the university. to engage in matters pertaining to real…
The brain injury association of virginia ("biav") is the primary source of information and personal support for thousands of individuals, families, and professionals living in virginia whose lives have been touched by a life altering,…
To provide excellence in the delivery of healthcare.
To deliver important healthcare services with exceptional quality and patient-centered care.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Richmond Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the most unlike its peers is Cover 1 Foundation. 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.
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 40 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
51 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. 51 of the 116 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 LEWIS GINTER BOTANICAL GARDEN INC ↗
- Who funds ROTARY YOUTH ACTIVITIES INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds FEED MORE INC ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA LEAGUE FOR PLANNED PARENTHOOD INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds THE MCSHIN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CARITAS ↗
- Who funds Ducks Unlimited Inc ↗
- Who funds THE CHILDHOOD LANGUAGE CENTER AT RICHMOND INC ↗
- Who funds B NAI B RITH ↗
- Who funds THE CROSS-OVER MINISTRY INC ↗
- Who funds RICHMOND METRO HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
- Who funds HEALTH BRIGADE ↗
- Who funds VPM MEDIA CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds MARINE TOYS FOR TOTS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds OPERATION HEALING FORCES INC ↗
- Who funds RICHMOND SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF RICHMOND ↗
- Who funds GOOD SAMARITAN MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds BLUE RIBBON COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds BELMONT COMMUNITY RESOURCE SERVICES ↗
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: The Community Foundation Inc · Carmax Foundation · McKesson Foundation Inc · Wilbur Moreland Havens Charitable Foundation · Virginia Nonprofit Housing Coalition · Fife Family Foundation Inc · Robert G Cabell III and Maude Morgan Cabell Foundation · Dominion Energy Charitable Foundation · Kathryn & W H Schwarzschild Fund · Annabella R Jenkins Foundation · Feed More Inc · Richard S Reynolds 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 Nachman-Marks Foundation Trust Attn J Nachman 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- The Shriners' Hospital for Children — 6% 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.