Skip to content
Philip Godfrey Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Philip Godfrey Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$95k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$95k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Philip Godfrey Charitable Trust’s FY2025 grant dollars went to The Connecticut Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

5
’17
3
’19
0
’20
0
’21
0
’25

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

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$95kEducation$14k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$94,609
Median grant
1
States reached
$31k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONNECTICUT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC$94,609
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MEGAN KENNEDY CO Univ of Connecticut: $500 → 11%CONNECTICUT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $95k → 12%POMPERAUG HIGH SCHOOL: $2k → 12%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

WI
NY
MA
PA
CT
RI
NC
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 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
University of Miami

See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.

Education
2
Western New England University

Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…

Education
3
Trustees of Dartmouth College

Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.

Education
4
Case Western Reserve University

Case Western Reserve University is an independent, research-oriented university with broadly based strengths in health, including medicine, nursing and dentistry; in engineering; in the arts and sciences; and in law, management and social…

Education
5
Trustees of Boston College

Mission strengthened by more than a century and a half of dedication to academic excellence, boston college commits itself to the highest standards of teaching and research in undergraduate, graduate and professional programs and to the…

Education
6
Bentley University

Organization's mission bentley university believes good business can impact more than the bottom line - it can change the world. bentley is a community of future business leaders who will deliver value in the marketplace and lasting…

Education
7
Cornell University

Education, research, medical services and other public services.

Education
8
Wake Forest University

Wake Forest University, a 501(c)(3) institution of higher education, is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in the liberal arts and in graduate and professional education. The organization is comprised of seven constituent parts: Wake…

Education
9
Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania

The trustees of the university of pennsylvania (the "university") sees itself as having a public service mission. in such regard, the university aims to provide a rich and diverse educational environment for its students; to pioneer…

Education
10
Dickinson College

Dickinson college provides a useful, innovative and interdisciplinary education in the liberal arts and sciences to prepare students to lead rich and fulfilling lives of engaged global citizenship

Education
11
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
12
Illinois Institute of Technology

To provide distinctive and relevant education in an environment of scientific, technological, and professional knowledge creation and innovation.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northeastern University; the most unlike its peers is The Connecticut Community Foundation. 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

10 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. 10 of the 18 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
10/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE CONNECTICUT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $94,609 · PhilanthropyTHE CONNECTICUT COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONPOMPERAUG HIGH SCHOOL: $2,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $1,000 · OtherKIRA NYKLICEK CO NORTHEASTERN UNIV: $500 · OtherWINSON CHEN CO UNIV OF WISCONSIN: $500 · OtherMICHELLE LU CO HARVARD UNIV: $500 · OtherALEC ZACKIN CO TUFTS UNIV: $500 · OtherMEGAN KENNEDY CO Univ of Connecticut: $500 · OtherZACHARY WISNEFSKY CO UNIV OF: $500 · OtherANNIE LEE CO MARIST COLLEGE: $500 · OtherCarnegie Mellon University: $375 · OtherMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $1,500 · EducationNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $1,375 · EducationDREXEL UNIVERSITY: $1,000 · EducationDUKE UNIVERSITY: $1,000 · EducationWilliam Marsh Rice University: $375 · EducationRensselaer Polytechnic Institute: $375 · EducationBROWN UNIVERSITY: $1,000 · Community Improvement
Philanthropy$94,609Other$6,875Education$5,625Community Improvement$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: $1,375 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDREXEL UNIVERSITY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDUKE UNIVERSITY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBROWN UNIVERSITY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWilliam Marsh Rice University: $375 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRensselaer Polytechnic Institute: $375 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCarnegie Mellon University: $375 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Philip Godfrey Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Philip Godfrey Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 26% of income from government
  • Trustees of Boston University: 12% of income from government
  • Northeastern University: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 18 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 Philip Godfrey’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