Skip to content
Ochsner Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ochsner Charitable Foundation

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$95k
Granted FY2022
16
Grants FY2022
4
States reached
$87k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of Ochsner Charitable Foundation’s FY2022 grant dollars went to Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2022 names 8 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

0
’20
0
’21
8
’22

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2022.

Philanthropy$95kEnvironment$200Arts & Culture$180Human Services$150Science & Tech$125Animals$50International$50Health$25Other$0
02FY2022 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k15 grants · $9k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $87k
$100
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Schwab Charitable Fund$86,566
Schwab Charitable Fund$5,670
Scwab Charitable Fund$2,264
Ringling Museum of Art$125
Mote Marine Laboratory and Aquarium$125
Marie Selby Botanical Gardens$100
Bolton Conservation Trust$100
Jewish Community Center$100
Schwab Charitable Fund$80
Nantucket Historical Association$55
Ox Fam America$50
Animal Shelter Inc$50
JGS Lifecare$25
Individual grant recipient$25
Veterans Inc of Worcester$25
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 (FY22–22, $25) 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%St Mary's Home for Children: $25 → 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.
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 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
Bartlett Arboretum Association Inc

To cultivate and develop an expansive collection of trees, gardens, and plants for all to explore, enjoy and study; and to provide through education and stewardship, a greener, healthier, more beautiful environment.

Environment
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
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
4
National Tropical Botanical Garden

To enrich life by perpetuating tropical plants, ecosystems and cultural heritage through discovery, scientific research, conservation, and education.

Environment
5
New York Botanical Garden

The new york botanical garden is a museum of plants and a scientific research center devoted to the study of plants and their uses. it is the garden's mission to improve public understanding of the natural world, horticulture, and the…

Environment
6
New England Aquarium Corporation

The new england aquarium is a catalyst for global change through public engagement and education, commitment to marine animal conservation, innovative scientific research, and effective advocacy for a vital and vibrant ocean.

Animals
7
Chelsea Jewish Nursing Home Inc

The organization's mission is to provide individuals throughout the greater boston area with the highest level of skilled nursing, rehabilitation and assisted living services without regard to ability to pay. the goal is to ensure both…

Health
8
Chelsea Jewish Green House Inc

The organization's mission is to provide individuals and families throughout the greater boston area with the highest level of skilled nursing and rehabilitation, and assisted living care without regard to ability to pay. the goal is to…

Health
9
The Norman Bird Sanctuary Trust

Our mission is to spark people's curiosity to explore, steward, and find peace and joy in nature. in service to this, norman bird sanctuary inspires, builds, and engages a community of stewards who preserve, protect, enjoy, and learn from…

Animals
10
Harvard Conservation Trust

To preserve the unique character and natural resources of harvard.

Environment
11
The Trustees of Reservations

Overview - founded in boston by pioneering landscape architect and open space visionary charles eliot in 1891, the trustees is the nation's first and the commonwealth's largest conservation and preservation nonprofit.

Environment
12
Jgs Administrative Services Inc

To provide administrative support to jgs lifecare corporation.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Mary's Home for Children; the most unlike its peers is Mote Marine Laboratory 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

9 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. 9 of the 14 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $94,580 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INCVarious: $11,374 · OtherVarious+5 more: $400 · OtherThe Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc: $100 · EnvironmentBOLTON CONSERVATION TRUST: $100 · EnvironmentNANTUCKET HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION: $55 · Arts & CultureOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $50 · InternationalANIMAL SHELTER INC: $50 · AnimalsJGS LIFECARE CORPORATION: $25 · HealthST MARY'S HOME FOR CHILDREN: $25 · Human Services
Philanthropy$94,580Other$11,774Environment$200Arts & Culture$55International$50Animals$50Health$25Human Services$25

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 budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $94,580 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOTE MARINE LABORATORY INC: $125 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOLTON CONSERVATION TRUST: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNANTUCKET HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION: $55 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL SHELTER INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJGS LIFECARE CORPORATION: $25 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetST MARY'S HOME FOR CHILDREN: $25 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA6× 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 Ochsner Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ochsner Charitable Foundation. 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Mote Marine Laboratory Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Animal Shelter Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Nantucket Historical Association: 1% of income from government
  • The Marie Selby Botanical Gardens Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Oxfam-America Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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.

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 14 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Ochsner’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