Skip to content
Rjc Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Rjc Fund

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.

$3k
Granted FY2022
4
Grants FY2022
3
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
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 2022.

Health$4kHuman Services$4kRecreation & Sports$2kPublic Benefit$2kPhilanthropy$2kHousing & Shelter$1kPublic Safety & Disaster$750Youth Development$750Other$0
02FY2022 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$30k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HEAD STRONG PROJECT$1,000
ROOM TO GROW$1,000
RELIGIOUS COALITION FOR REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE$500
EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE$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 (FY17–22, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 67% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%EMMAUS INC: $1k → 10%ROOM TO GROW: $1k → 17%ROOM TO GROW: $1k → 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

NY
MA
IN
NJ
CA
VA
DC
AL
FL
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
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
2
Donor Alliance Inc

Donor Alliance saves and heals lives through organ and tissue donation. Donor Alliance is one of 55 Federally designated, non-profit organ procurement organizations serving Colorado and most of Wyoming. Additionally, it is a member of the…

Health
3
Coop Careers Inc

Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.

Education
4
Democracy Works Inc

The organization's mission is to leverage web-technologies to improve civic engagement and voter education.

Civil Rights
5
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
6
Us Digital Response

U.s. digital response is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that helps governments, nonprofits, and public entities respond quickly to critical public needs. the organization serves the public by leveraging a network of pro bono…

Public Safety & Disaster
7
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
8
Robert a Toigo Foundation

Our mission is to shape the future of finance by developing leaders whose innovation, investment excellence, and human-centered leadership advance the industry and its adjacent sectors.

Education
9
Voteamerica

The mission of voteamerica is to strengthen united states democracy by increasing voter turnout.

Civil Rights
10
National Committee for Quality Assurance

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

Health
11
Christianity Today International

Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.

Religion
12
Union Health System

To serve our communities by provding innovative and compassionate healthcare.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Brooklyn Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Head Strong Project Inc. 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

11 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. 11 of the 14 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHIPS - COMMUNITY HELP IN THE PARK: $2,000 · OtherCHIPS - COMMUNITY HELP IN T…COTA - Children's Organ Transplant Association: $1,000 · OtherCOTA - Children's Organ Tra…NAVY MARINE CORP RELIEF SOCIETY: $750 · OtherNAVY MARINE CORP RELIEF SOC…ACTION IN COMMUNITY THROUGH SERVICE: $600 · OtherACTION IN COMMUNITY THROUGH…HEAD STRONG PROJECT INC: $3,000 · HealthHEAD STRONG PROJECT…VOTERIDERS: $2,000 · Civil RightsVOTERIDERSEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $500 · Civil RightsEQUAL JUSTICE INITI…RELIGIOUS COALITION FOR REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE: $500 · Civil RightsRELIGIOUS COALITION…ROOM TO GROW NATIONAL INC: $2,000 · Human ServicesROOM TO GROW NATION…EMMAUS INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesEMMAUS INCNATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION: $2,000 · Public BenefitNATIONAL MIL…BROOKLYN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 · PhilanthropyBROOKLYN C…THE IRONMAN FOUNDATION INC: $618 · PhilanthropyTHE IRONMA…DRIVE CHANGE INC: $750 · Employment
Other$4,350Health$3,000Civil Rights$3,000Human Services$3,000Public Benefit$2,000Philanthropy$1,618Employment$750

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 budgetHEAD STRONG PROJECT INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVOTERIDERS: $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetROOM TO GROW NATIONAL INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBROOKLYN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOTA - Children's Organ Transplant Association: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEMMAUS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDRIVE CHANGE INC: $750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE IRONMAN FOUNDATION INC: $618 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRELIGIOUS COALITION FOR REPRODUCTIVE CHOICE: $500 over 1y, 0.2% 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 Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC10.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · 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 Rjc Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rjc Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 10%
  • Emmaus Inc: 10% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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 14 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Rjc’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