Skip to content
Richard W Goldman Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Richard W Goldman Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3.9M
Granted FY2024still arriving
23
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$450k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Philanthropy$9.3MHuman Services$5.1MEducation$2.5MHealth$1.8MCivil Rights$1.4MCommunity Improvement$1.2MPublic Benefit$850kCrime & Legal$550kOther$0
02FY2024 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k18 grants · $1.9M
  • $250k+5 grants · $2.0M
$100,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$83M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS$450,000
SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND$415,000
SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND$415,000
MORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST$415,000
START EARLY$300,000
THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND$225,000
PARENTCHILD$200,000
CENTER FOR LAW AND SOCIAL POLICY$150,000
ROBIN HOOD FOUNDATION$150,000
PROSPERITY NOW$100,000
CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POLICY$100,000
LIFT$100,000
MATERNAL MENTAL HEALTH LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE$100,000
SPRINGBOARD TO OPPORTUNITIES$100,000
CHILD TRENDS$100,000
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 (FY19–24, $4.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 31% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE: $150k → 16%CHILDREN'S COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO: $50k → 10%TIDES CENTER: $120k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS: $450k → 5%SPRINGBOARD TO OPPORTUNITIES: $100k → 23%CHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $100k → 7%CHILD TRENDS: $100k → 8%CENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE: $150k → 16%TIDES CENTER: $100k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS: $450k → 5%CHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $100k → 7%CHILD TRENDS: $100k → 8%TIDES CENTER: $100k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS: $300k → 5%CHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $100k → 7%CHILD TRENDS: $100k → 8%CENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE: $150k → 16%TIDES CENTER: $100k → 14%ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS: $175k → 5%CHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $100k → 7%CHILD TRENDS: $100k → 8%CENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE: $150k → 16%ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS: $150k → 5%CHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $100k → 7%CHILD TRENDS: $100k → 8%ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS: $150k → 5%CHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $100k → 7%CHILD TRENDS: $100k → 8%CENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE: $100k → 16%CENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE: $30k → 16%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
IL
WI
NY
MA
PA
CT
CA
WV
VA
MD
KS
DC
MS
GA
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 31% of Richard W Goldman Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 20% of the giving stays in DC; by stated purpose, 16%.

Richard W Goldman Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$14M · 18 repeat orgs$825k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
7

Total granted

$14M
$575k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+23%

Still filing today

83%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $250k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementEducationHealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • AF
    ALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS FKA BIRTH TO FIVE POLICY ALLIANCE
    6× · 2019–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +36%
  • START EARLY
    6× · 2019–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +73%
  • PI
    PARENTCHILD INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +72%

Funded once

  • VV
    Verified Voting Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +56%
  • WH
    WOMEN'S HEALTH CENTER OF WEST VIRGINIA INC
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue -33%
  • NA
    NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE EDUCATION OF YOUNG CHILDREN
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +23%
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
Partnership for Public Service Inc

Making our government work better is a daunting task, and we are a small organization seeking to transform a government that employs millions of civilians and manages trillions of dollars in taxpayer revenue needed to protect public…

Employment
2
Planned Parenthood North Central States Foundation

To build and maintain financial support for planned parenthood north central states to advance and protect sexual and reproductive health care for all.

Human Services
3
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
4
Center for American Progress

The center for american progress (cap) is an independent nonpartisan policy institute that is dedicated to improving the lives of all americans through bold, progressive ideas, as well as strong leadership and concerted action. our aim is…

Civil Rights
5
National Perinatal Information Center

The national perinatal information center (npic) is dedicated to the improvement of perinatal health through comparative data analysis, program evaluation, health services research and professional continuing education.

Health
6
Planned Parenthood North Central States

To support access to high-quality, affordable reproductive health care services.

Health
7
Common Impact Inc

Common impact's mission is to strengthen the capacity of social change organizations, enabling them to better run and scale their programs. through its partnership with companies, common impact taps into the business skills and expertise…

Unclassified
8
Minnesota Child Care Resource and Referral Network

Child care aware of minnesota was incorporated in 1992 to provide technical assistance, training and coordination for the child care resource and referral programs throughout minnesota, to collect data regarding the supply of and demand…

Human Services
9
National Committee for Quality Assurance

Our mission: to improve the quality of health care.our vision: better health care. better choices. better health.

Health
10
Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric Aids Foundation

The elizabeth glaser pediatric aids foundation (egpaf) is a proven leader in the fight against pediatric hiv/aids and has reached over 33 million pregnant women with services to prevent transmission of hiv to their babies. to date, egpaf…

Health
11
United Way of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey

United way's mission is to end intergenerational poverty in our region by harnessing, leveraging and strategically investing the collective power of donors, advocates and volunteers, to help individuals and families break the cycle of…

Philanthropy
12
The Campbell Institute

Children's institute's mission is to leverage research, practice, policy, and advocacy to shift systems toward justice for families so that all of oregon's children, prenatal to grade 5, have access to opportunity.

Unclassified
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for the Study of Social Policy; the most unlike its peers is National Association for the Education of Young Children. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

31 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. 31 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/31
Grantees still filing
20/31
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $4,670,668 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INCMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC: $2,335,334 · PhilanthropyMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TR…ROBIN HOOD FOUNDATION: $750,000 · PhilanthropyROBIN HOOD FOUNDATION+2 more: $125,000 · PhilanthropyALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS FKA BIRTH TO FIVE POLICY ALLIANCE: $2,125,000 · Human ServicesALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCC…CENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE INC: $730,000 · Human ServicesCENTERING HEALTHCARE IN…TIDES CENTER: $620,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTERCHILD TRENDS INC: $600,000 · Human ServicesCHILD TRENDS INCCHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $600,000 · Human ServicesCHILD CARE AWARE OF AME…+2 more: $150,000 · Human ServicesSTART EARLY: $1,840,000 · OtherSTART EARLYPARENTCHILD INC: $1,240,000 · OtherPARENTCHILD INCFAMILY VALUES WORK: $600,000 · OtherFAMILY VALUES WORKASCEND AT ASPEN INSTITUTE: $450,000 · OtherASCEND AT ASPEN INSTITUTECHILD FIRST INC: $420,000 · OtherCHILD FIRST INCCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POLICY: $600,000 · OtherCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POL…CENTER FOR LAW AND SOCIAL POLICY: $550,000 · OtherCENTER FOR LAW AND SOCIAL POLICYMIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE: $350,000 · OtherBRIGHTER BEGINNINGS: $310,000 · Other+7 more: $575,000 · Other+7 morePROSPERITY NOW: $650,000 · Community ImprovementTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC: $525,000 · Community ImprovementNEW VENTURE FUND: $800,000 · EnvironmentJUMPSTART FOR YOUNG CHILDREN INC: $545,000 · EducationNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE EDUCATION OF YOUNG CHILDREN: $100,000 · EducationLIFT INC: $620,000 · Employment
Philanthropy$7,881,002Human Services$4,825,000Other$6,935,000Community Improvement$1,175,000Environment$800,000Education$645,000Employment$620,000

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 budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $4,670,668 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC: $2,335,334 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetALLIANCE FOR EARLY SUCCESS FKA BIRTH TO FIVE POLICY ALLIANCE: $2,125,000 over 6y, 4.5% of budgetSTART EARLY: $1,840,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetPARENTCHILD INC: $1,240,000 over 6y, 5.9% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $800,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetROBIN HOOD FOUNDATION: $750,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCENTERING HEALTHCARE INSTITUTE INC: $730,000 over 5y, 3.9% of budgetPROSPERITY NOW: $650,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetLIFT INC: $620,000 over 6y, 2.4% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $620,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCHILD TRENDS INC: $600,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetCHILD CARE AWARE OF AMERICA: $600,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetCENTER FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POLICY: $600,000 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetCENTER FOR LAW AND SOCIAL POLICY: $550,000 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetJUMPSTART FOR YOUNG CHILDREN INC: $545,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC: $525,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCHILD FIRST INC: $420,000 over 4y, 7.0% of budgetMIGRATION POLICY INSTITUTE: $350,000 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetBRIGHTER BEGINNINGS: $310,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetVerified Voting Foundation: $150,000 over 1y, 9.4% of budgetWOMEN'S HEALTH CENTER OF WEST VIRGINIA INC: $100,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE EDUCATION OF YOUNG CHILDREN: $100,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSPRINGBOARD TO OPPORTUNITIES: $100,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetMATERNAL MENTAL HEALTH LDRSHP ALLIANCE: $100,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetNEW GEORGIA PROJECT INC: $75,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSEATTLE FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE BAY AREA: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetChildren's Council of San Francisco: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMONWEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

WK Kellogg FoundationAnnie E Casey Foundat…Silicon Valley Commun…The Robert Wood Johns…Alliance for Early Su…Pritzker Family Found…The Heising-Simons Fo…The David and Lucile …ImpactassetsincGates FoundationTides FoundationThe Ford Foundation
WK Kellogg FoundationMI25.7× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: WK Kellogg Foundation · Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Alliance for Early Success Fka Birth to Five Policy Alliance · Pritzker Family Foundation · The Heising-Simons Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Gates Foundation · Tides Foundation · The Ford 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 Richard W Goldman Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Richard W Goldman Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 50%
  • Child Trends Inc: 50% of income from government
  • Third Sector New England Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Richard W Goldman Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Richard W Goldman Family Foundation 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 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Richard W Goldman Family’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