Skip to content
Passman for People Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Passman for People Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$65k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$48k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$167kPublic Safety & Disaster$75kArts & Culture$68kHealth$61kInternational$21kHuman Services$20kReligion$15kEnvironment$12kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $58k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$656k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ALOHA UNITED WAY$47,500
SUSAN B KOMEN 3-DAY$10,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION$2,500
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 (FY18–18, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Charity Water: $5k → 17%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

IL
NY
CT
CA
VA
MD
DC
HI
AL
GA
TX
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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$409k · 14 repeat orgs$78k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
17

Total granted

$409k
$61k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
+63%

Still filing today

71%
35%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthPhilanthropyInternationalHuman ServicesReligionEducationOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $75k · revenue ×11
  • WR
    WILL ROGERS MOTION PICTURE PIONEERS FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2023 · $68k · revenue +0%
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF THE CHATTAHOOCHEE VALLEY INC
    4× · 2017–2023 · $57k · revenue +61%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $7k
  • GC
    Green Chimneys
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • C
    CURE
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its 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
Waterorg

Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.

International
2
Clinton Health Access Initiative Inc

For over 20 years, chai's mission has been to save lives and improve health outcomes in low-and middle-income countries around the world. we do this by enabling the government and private sector to strengthen and sustain quality health…

International
3
World Hope International Inc

The purpose of world hope international, inc. (whi) includes providing assistance to economically disadvantaged people through long-term social transformation projects, including anti-trafficking protection, clean water, economic…

International
4
United Way Worldwide

To improve lives by mobilizing caring power of communities around the world to advance common good.

Philanthropy
5
Water for People

Water for people exists to develop high quality water and sanitation, accessible to all, and sustained by strong communities, businesses, and governments, working in ten countries; guatemala, honduras, tanzania, peru, bolivia, uganda,…

International
6
The One Campaign

The ONE Campaign ("ONE") continued its work to educate and raise awareness among the public, media and policymakers around the world about the importance of official development assistance and international programs that (Continued on…

Unclassified
7
Project Hope - the People-to-People Health Foundation Inc

To conduct and support programs and activities aimed at solving some of the world's greatest public health challenges, with a specific focus on enabling health workers to have the greatest possible impact on the health of the people they…

International
8
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
9
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
10
Ceo Roundtable On Cancer Inc

The mission of the ceo roundtable on cancer is to make continual progress toward the elimination of cancer as a personal disease and public health problem through initiatives that reduce the risk of cancer, enable early diagnosis,…

Health
11
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
12
Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation

Partners In Health (PIH) is a non-profit, global health organization that fights social injustice by bringing the benefits of modern medical science first and foremost to the most vulnerable communities worldwide. In Haiti, Malawi, Rwanda,…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of the Chattahoochee Valley Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Preemptive Love Coalition. 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

17 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. 17 of the 34 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
10/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ALOHA UNITED WAY INC: $92,500 · PhilanthropyALOHA UNITED WAY INCUNITED WAY OF THE CHATTAHOOCHEE VALLEY INC: $56,500 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF THE CHATTAHOOCHEE VALLE…RALLY FOUNDATION INC: $12,500 · PhilanthropyRALLY FOUNDATION INCUNITED WAY OF CHATTAHOOCHEE VALLEY: $17,500 · OtherUNITED WAY OF CHATTAHOOCH…OBRIA MEDICAL CLINIC OF GWINNETT: $10,000 · OtherOBRIA MEDICAL CLINIC OF G…SUSAN B KOMEN 3-DAY: $10,000 · OtherSUSAN B KOMEN 3-DAYOPERATION MOBILIZATION: $10,000 · OtherOPERATION MOBILIZATIONJuvenile Diabeties Research Foundation: $7,500 · OtherJuvenile Diabeties Resear…NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $7,000 · OtherNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $6,876 · OtherIndividual grant recipien…Green Chimneys: $5,000 · OtherCURE: $5,000 · OtherTroy University: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherVARIETY - CHILDRENS CHARITY OF THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION: $4,648 · OtherMULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $4,000 · OtherVARIETY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $3,978 · Other+4 more: $8,500 · Other+4 moreWILL ROGERS MOTION PICTURE PIONEERS FOUNDATION: $67,500 · HealthWILL ROGERS MOTION PI…THE GEORGIA WELLNESS GROUP INC: $15,000 · HealthTHE GEORGIA WELLNESS …+4 more: $9,000 · Health+4 moreWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $75,000 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KITCHE…AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 · InternationalAMERICARES FOUNDATIO…Buddy Hoffman Foundation: $12,500 · ReligionCHARITY GLOBAL INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesWATER IS BASIC: $1,000 · Human ServicesColumbus State University Athletic Fund Inc: $5,000 · EducationEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $5,000 · Civil Rights
Philanthropy$161,500Other$110,002Health$91,500International$90,000Religion$12,500Human Services$11,000Education$5,000Civil Rights$5,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetALOHA UNITED WAY INC: $92,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $75,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetWILL ROGERS MOTION PICTURE PIONEERS FOUNDATION: $67,500 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE CHATTAHOOCHEE VALLEY INC: $56,500 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetTHE GEORGIA WELLNESS GROUP INC: $15,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRALLY FOUNDATION INC: $12,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBuddy Hoffman Foundation: $12,500 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCHARITY GLOBAL INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $7,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetColumbus State University Athletic Fund Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PREEMPTIVE LOVE COALITION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNAMI National: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWATER IS BASIC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds ALOHA UNITED WAY INC ↗
  • Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
  • Who funds WILL ROGERS MOTION PICTURE PIONEERS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF THE CHATTAHOOCHEE VALLEY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE GEORGIA WELLNESS GROUP INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds RALLY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Buddy Hoffman Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CHARITY GLOBAL INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Columbus State University Athletic Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds THE PREEMPTIVE LOVE COALITION ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION ↗
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
  • Who funds NAMI National ↗
  • Who funds WATER IS BASIC ↗

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.

Natl Christian Charit…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA9.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Passman for People Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Passman for People Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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 · 0–30%
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 34 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Passman for People’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