Skip to content
Robert a & Gloria Sherman Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Robert a & Gloria Sherman 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.

$13k
Granted FY2023
29
Grants FY2023
13
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Health$44kInternational$24kAnimals$19kEnvironment$13kPublic Benefit$11kPhilanthropy$10kHuman Services$9kFood & Nutrition$3kOther$0
02FY2023 · 29 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$300
Median grant
13
States reached
$10k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CARTER CENTER$5,000
FEED PETS HOMELESS$500
FRIENDS IN NEED CHILDS CENTER$500
USA FOR UNHCR$500
Individual grant recipient$500
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$400
PEACEFUL VALLEY DONKEY RESCUE$400
SIERRA CLUB$400
AMERICAN KIDNEY FUND$400
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL$300
ANTI DEFAMATION LEAGUE$300
PARKINSONS FOUNDATION$300
Individual grant recipient$300
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND$300
LUPUS FDN OF AMERICA$300
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 (FY19–23, $800) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%FREEDOM SERVICE DOGS: $100 → 8%THE SEEING EYE: $200 → 4%CHRISTIAN APPALACHIAN PROJECT: $300 → 26%CHRISTIAN APPALACHIAN PROJECT: $100 → 26%AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR THE BLIND: $100 → 7%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

MN
IL
MI
NY
OR
NV
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
MO
KY
VA
MD
SC
DC
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.

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$69k · 45 repeat orgs$73k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against +28% for those funded once.

45 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2023, 30 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

45
49

Total granted

$69k
$69k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
+28%

Still filing today

73%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
AnimalsInternationalHealthEnvironmentHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • TC
    THE CARTER CENTER INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $15k · revenue +32%
  • AW
    ANIMAL WELFARE LEAGUE
    4× · 2017–2022 · $13k · revenue +140%
  • TP
    The Pittsburgh Project
    2× · 2019–2021 · $3k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • GU
    GLICKMAN UROLOGICAL & KIDNEY INSTITUTE - CLEVELAND CLINIC
    one grant, 2017 · $30k
  • JC
    JIMMY CARTER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • CF
    CARTER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
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
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
2
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
3
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
4
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
5
Target Als Foundation Inc

Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…

Education
6
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
7
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
8
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
9
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
10
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
11
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
12
Panthera Corporation

Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened. panthera develops, implements and oversees wild cat conservation strategies on a global scale.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Seeing Eye Inc; the most unlike its peers is Animal Welfare League. 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

63 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. 63 of the 110 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)
63/63
Grantees still filing
53/63
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GLICKMAN UROLOGICAL & KIDNEY INSTITUTE - CLEVELAND CLINIC: $30,000 · OtherGLICKMAN UROLOGICAL & KIDNEY INSTITUTE - CLEVELAND CLINICJIMMY CARTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherJIMMY CARTER FOUNDATIONCARTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherCARTER FOUNDATIONTHE JACKSON CENTER: $3,000 · Other+59 more: $26,766 · Other+59 moreTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $15,000 · InternationalTHE CARTER CENTER…Mercy Ships International: $1,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $1,000 · InternationalWATER MISSIONS INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INC: $900 · InternationalHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $800 · International+5 more: $2,850 · International+5 moreANIMAL WELFARE LEAGUE: $12,500 · AnimalsANIMAL WELFAR…HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · AnimalsHUMANE FARMIN…Peaceful Valley Donkey Rescue Inc: $700 · AnimalsHumane World for Animals Inc: $600 · AnimalsBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $600 · Animals+6 more: $1,600 · Animals+6 moreAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $2,000 · HealthPARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC: $1,600 · HealthALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 · HealthAMERICAN PARKINSON DISEASE ASSOC: $1,000 · HealthAMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RESEARCH: $900 · HealthBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $800 · HealthARTHRITIS FOUNDATION INC: $700 · HealthPhysicians Committee for Responsible Med: $700 · HealthAmerican Heart Association Inc: $600 · Health+2 more: $600 · HealthWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $5,000 · EnvironmentTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $1,550 · EnvironmentOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $1,000 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICE: $900 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $400 · Environment+3 more: $750 · EnvironmentThe Pittsburgh Project: $2,500 · Community ImprovementGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $1,500 · Human ServicesCHRISTIAN APPALACHIAN PROJECT INC: $400 · Human ServicesTHE SEEING EYE INC: $200 · Human ServicesAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR THE BLIND INC: $100 · Human ServicesFREEDOM SERVICE DOGS INC: $100 · Human Services
Other$79,766International$22,550Animals$17,000Health$9,900Environment$9,600Community Improvement$2,500Human Services$2,300

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 budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL WELFARE LEAGUE: $12,500 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Pittsburgh Project: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC: $1,600 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN KIDNEY FUND INC: $1,600 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $1,550 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMercy Ships International: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWATER MISSIONS INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $1,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN PARKINSON DISEASE ASSOC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RESEARCH: $900 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $900 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD & WATER WATCH: $800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND: $800 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHELEN KELLER INTERNATIONAL: $800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetARTHRITIS FOUNDATION INC: $700 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPhysicians Committee for Responsible Med: $700 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $700 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPeaceful Valley Donkey Rescue Inc: $700 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $650 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFeeding America: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUnited States Association for UNHCR: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREENPEACE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLupus Foundation of America Inc: $500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHRISTIAN APPALACHIAN PROJECT INC: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EARTH: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA CLUB: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFARM SANCTUARY INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLUPUS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $300 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.

Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY10.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Robert a & Gloria Sherman Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Robert a & Gloria Sherman Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 30%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 110 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Robert a & Gloria Sherman 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