Skip to content
Rainbow Heritage Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Rainbow Heritage Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$5k
Granted FY2026still arriving
6
Grants FY2026still arriving
3
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$21kEducation$16kHuman Services$7kEnvironment$7kArts & Culture$1kYouth Development$1kScience & Tech$535Animals$360Other$0
02FY2026 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$500
Median grant
3
States reached
$817k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Boston University$3,250
Lisbon Area Historical Society$500
FUNTASIA IMPACT USA$500
FRIENDS GARDEN OF Gods$500
Education For All Morocco$273
Associ for Supporting Contemporary$250
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.

US giving: 61% of grant dollars ($36k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 39% that went abroad ($23k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–22, $3k) 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%Camp Kesem: $1k → 14%Camp Kesem: $500 → 14%Camp Kesem: $500 → 14%Camp Kesem: $500 → 14%Camp Kesem: $51 → 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

AK
WA
MT
IL
MA
SD
IN
CA
NE
WV
VA
MD
AZ
TN
DC
GA

Beyond the US: 39% of all-years giving ($23k)

6 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
China$20k · 1 grant
Canada$755 · 1 grant
Iceland$541 · 1 grant
Taiwan$500 · 1 grant
Japan$442 · 2 grants
Peru$300 · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

53%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$33k · 19 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +24% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2026, 18 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
28

Total granted

$33k
$28k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+13%

Still filing today

68%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
EnvironmentAnimalsEducationRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesScience & TechOther
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

  • JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2018–2022 · $10k · revenue +51%
  • TF
    THE FAMILY GIVING TREE
    2× · 2020–2021 · $5k · revenue +2%
  • University of Illinois Foundation
    5× · 2021–2025 · $3k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • JH
    Jianyang Huang Keng Tong Tau Villag
    one grant, 2018 · $20k
  • PF
    PRIDE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue -100%
  • GG
    Global Glimpsegraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +62%
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
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
2
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
3
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
4
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
5
The Wildlands Conservancy

The Wildlands Conservancy's dual mission is to preserve the beauty and biodiversity of the earth and to provide programs so that children may know the wonder and joy of nature.

Environment
6
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
7
Center for Natural Lands Management

The mission of the center for natural lands management is (a) to conserve native species, their habitat and functioning ecosystems in perpetuity, (b) to own and/or manage lands in an ecologically beneficial manner consistent with local,…

Environment
8
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
9
Greater Farallones Association

Gfa works in partnership with and on behalf of the greater farallones and cordell bank national marine sanctuaries to preserve, monitor, research, educate about and enhance these invaluable marine resources.

Animals
10
Amazon Conservation Team

The amazon conservation team (act) partners with indigenous and other local communities to protect tropical forests and strengthen traditional culture.

Science & Tech
11
New Jersey Conservation Foundation

Recognizing that a healthy environment is critical to the well-being and survival of all living things, new jersey conservation foundation is devoted to preserving land and protecting natural resources throughout new jersey's (continued on…

Environment
12
The Jmt Wilderness Conservancy

Working to restore the watersheds, wilderness, and wildlife in the high sierra nevada following the john muir trail (est. 1915) for all life in california.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Wilderness Society; the most unlike its peers is ShoreLake Arts. 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

31 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. 31 of the 53 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/31
Grantees still filing
21/31
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Jianyang Huang Keng Tong Tau Villag: $20,000 · OtherJianyang Huang Keng Tong Tau VillagTHE FAMILY GIVING TREE: $4,710 · OtherTHE FAMILY GIVING TREETRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $3,750 · OtherTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITYIndividual grant recipient: $2,150 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+27 more: $9,629 · Other+27 moreJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $10,300 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYUniversity of Illinois Foundation: $2,750 · EducationUniversity of Illinois Fo…Global Glimpse: $1,000 · EducationGlobal GlimpseCYLBURN ARBORETUM FRIENDS INC: $2,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,400 · EnvironmentIJAMS NATURE CENTER INC: $500 · EnvironmentTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $250 · EnvironmentSAN DIEGO COASTKEEPER: $200 · EnvironmentDucks Unlimited Inc: $170 · Environment+4 more: $235 · EnvironmentCamp Kesem National: $2,551 · Human ServicesBERBAWY MAKERS INC: $500 · Science & TechNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $200 · AnimalsCALIFORNIA KILLER WHALE PROJECT INC: $100 · AnimalsDefenders of Wildlife: $60 · AnimalsTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $36 · AnimalsAPPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY: $250 · Recreation & SportsMission Trails Regional Park Foundation Inc: $100 · Recreation & SportsCALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION: $25 · Recreation & Sports
Other$40,239Education$14,050Environment$4,755Human Services$2,551Science & Tech$500Animals$396Recreation & Sports$375

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $10,300 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FAMILY GIVING TREE: $4,710 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $3,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Illinois Foundation: $2,750 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCamp Kesem National: $2,551 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCYLBURN ARBORETUM FRIENDS INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,400 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetALLIANCE FOR THE GREAT LAKES: $1,250 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPRIDE FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetGlobal Glimpse: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIJAMS NATURE CENTER INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBERBAWY MAKERS INC: $500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTHE COASTAL HERITAGE SOCIETY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAPPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetShoreLake Arts: $250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN DIEGO COASTKEEPER: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKEEP SEDONA BEAUTIFUL INC: $200 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDucks Unlimited Inc: $170 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMission Trails Regional Park Foundation Inc: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA KILLER WHALE PROJECT INC: $100 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetGardens for Humanity Inc: $100 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $75 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $60 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA CLUB: $40 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $40 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTROUT UNLIMITED INC: $36 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ARBOR DAY FOUNDATION: $20 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.

The Pfizer Foundation…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Pfizer Foundation IncNY9.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Rainbow Heritage Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rainbow Heritage Foundation. 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 12%
  • Trustees of Boston University: 12% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
5report 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.

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 53 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Rainbow Heritage’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