Skip to content
Ohrstrom Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Ohrstrom Foundation Inc

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.

$4.4M
Granted FY2020
37
Grants FY2020
12
States reached
$1.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

72% of Ohrstrom Foundation Inc’s FY2020 grant dollars went to Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2020 names 26 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

01What it funds
01FY2020 · 37 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k21 grants · $450k
  • $50k–250k12 grants · $795k
  • $250k+3 grants · $3.1M
$35,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VANGUARD CHARITABLE$1,050,000
VANGUARD CHARITABLE$1,050,000
VANGUARD CHARITABLE$1,050,000
5 GYRES$80,000
ASHESI UNIVERSITY$80,000
SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER$75,000
SMITHSONIAN CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE$75,000
NATIONAL INDIAN YOUTH LEADERSHIP PROJECT$75,000
RAINFOREST TRUST$75,000
TOGETHER WE RISE$75,000
LITTLE SISTERS FUND$60,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$50,000
MADRE$50,000
WINDY HILL FOUNDATION$50,000
GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN$50,000
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%VANGUARD CHARITABLE: $1.1M → 16%LITTLE SISTERS FUND: $60k → 7%TOGETHER WE RISE: $75k → 10%MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $30k → 10%5 GYRES: $80k → 14%MADRE: $50k → 17%GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN: $50k → 20%NATIONAL INDIAN YOUTH LEADERSHIP PROJECT: $75k → 14%HORTON'S KIDS: $10k → 14%OCEAN BLUE PROJECT: $10k → 18%CONSCIOUS ALLIANCE: $40k → 12%ASHESI UNIVERSITY: $80k → 9%C4 RECOVERY SOLUTIONS: $35k → 6%PALESTINE LEGAL: $10k → 14%PIEDMONT CRUSH: $10k → 8%SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $75k → 8%SMITHSONIAN CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $75k → 10%CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION: $25k → 6%WILD EARTH ALLIES: $40k → 8%VOLO CITY FOUNDATION (ACTIVE SOCIAL COMMUNITIES): $10k → 19%VANGUARD CHARITABLE: $1.1M → 16%PLASTIC OCEANS INTERNATIONAL: $15k → 14%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $50k → 17%KAILASH SATYARTHI CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $15k → 14%APPALACHIAN VOICES: $15k → 8%VANGUARD CHARITABLE: $1.1M → 16%GETTING OUT STAYING OUT: $30k → 17%OCEAN CONSERVANCY: $15k → 14%SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $25k → 8%SENTENCING PROJECT: $10k → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE: $5k → 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

WA
ID
IL
NY
MA
OR
CA
CO
VA
MD
NM
DC
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
3
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
4
One Earth Philanthropy

One Earth's mission is to empower everyone, everywhere, with the knowledge, inspiration, and opportunity to heal the Earth and reclaim our future.

Environment
5
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
6
Clean Oceans International

Our Mission: Reduce oceanic plastic pollution through Research, Innovation, and Direct Action.

Science & Tech
7
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
8
Bank Climate Advocates

Bank Climate Advocates (BCA) combats climate change and its adverse effects primarily by using legal advocacy and action to align public financial institutions' investment policies and practices with the 1.5 degrees C warming limitation…

Environment
9
Environment Now
—
10
International Council On Environmental Economics and Development Union
Human Services
11
CarbonPlan

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

Environment
12
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Sentencing Project; the most unlike its peers is The 5 Gyres Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

27 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. 27 of the 35 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/27
Grantees still filing
23/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $3,150,000 · PhilanthropyVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAMASHESI UNIVERSITY: $80,000 · OtherASHESI UNIVERS…The 5 Gyres Institute: $80,000 · OtherThe 5 Gyres In…SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $75,000 · OtherSOUTHERN ENVIR…SMITHSONIAN CONSERVATION BIOLOGY INSTITUTE: $75,000 · OtherSMITHSONIAN CO…WINDY HILL FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 · OtherWINDY HILL FOU…GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN: $50,000 · OtherGLOBAL FUND FO…FAUQUIER FREE CLINIC INC: $40,000 · OtherFAUQUIER FREE …GETTING OUT STAYING OUT: $30,000 · OtherGETTING OUT ST…+8 more: $80,000 · Other+8 moreRAINFOREST TRUST: $75,000 · InternationalLITTLE SISTERS FUND INC: $60,000 · InternationalMADRE INC: $50,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INC: $50,000 · InternationalMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $30,000 · InternationalA JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE: $25,000 · InternationalWild Earth Allies Inc: $40,000 · EnvironmentTHE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $30,000 · EnvironmentSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $25,000 · EnvironmentCHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · EnvironmentPLASTIC OCEANS INTERNATIONAL: $15,000 · EnvironmentAPPALACHIAN VOICES: $15,000 · EnvironmentOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $15,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL INDIAN YOUTH LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROJECT INC: $75,000 · Youth DevelopmentOcean Blue Project Inc: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentTOGETHER WE RISE: $75,000 · Recreation & SportsTHE CONSCIOUS ALLIANCE: $40,000 · Food & NutritionC4 Recovery Solutions Inc: $35,000 · Health
Philanthropy$3,150,000Other$560,000International$290,000Environment$165,000Youth Development$85,000Recreation & Sports$75,000Food & Nutrition$40,000Health$35,000

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 budgetThe 5 Gyres Institute: $80,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetSOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $75,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTOGETHER WE RISE: $75,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNATIONAL INDIAN YOUTH LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT PROJECT INC: $75,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetRAINFOREST TRUST: $75,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLITTLE SISTERS FUND INC: $60,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetMADRE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWINDY HILL FOUNDATION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetTHE CONSCIOUS ALLIANCE: $40,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWild Earth Allies Inc: $40,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetFAUQUIER FREE CLINIC INC: $40,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetC4 Recovery Solutions Inc: $35,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetTHE PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $30,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $30,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetA JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $25,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetCHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPLASTIC OCEANS INTERNATIONAL: $15,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetAPPALACHIAN VOICES: $15,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA PLACE TO BE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE SENTENCING PROJECT: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHORTON'S KIDS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

Fagus FoundationThe Luminescence Foun…Vanguard Charitable E…Paypal Charitable Giv…Network for GoodVerizon FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Donor Advised Charita…
Fagus FoundationVA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fagus Foundation · The Luminescence Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · Verizon Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Ohrstrom Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ohrstrom Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Ohrstrom Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Ohrstrom Foundation Inc 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 35 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2021) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2020, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Ohrstrom’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