· Private foundation
Robert J Bauer Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k12 grants · $78k
- $10k–50k36 grants · $774k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $723k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NORTHERN VIRGINIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE | $167,000 |
| NEW YORK UNIVERSITY | $167,000 |
| KARL SCHMITZ UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE | $100,000 |
| CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE | $88,000 |
| GOODWIN LIVING FOUNDATION | $67,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $67,000 |
| PREVENTION OF BLINDNESS SOCIETY (DC | $67,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $46,000 |
| AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION | $40,000 |
| GIVE DIRECTLY | $40,000 |
| TERRAPRAXIS | $38,000 |
| BERNNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE | $36,000 |
| PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERVICE FOUNDAT | $36,000 |
| DUNKARD BRETHREN CHURCH | $31,000 |
| NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO | $31,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $87k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 3% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +33% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
86 repeat relationships — 31 still active in FY2025, 55 since wound down; 24 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 36% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.0M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC9× · 2017–2025 · $305k · revenue +98%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC8× · 2017–2024 · $277k · revenue +12%- CACLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC8× · 2018–2025 · $255k · revenue ×12
Funded once
Feeding Americagraduatedone grant, 2020 · $30k · revenue +40%- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $25k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $25k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
To raise awareness about the potential to reduce environmental harm by shifting electricity use to particular times; to encourage the development and spread of common protocols for this practice.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Action Against Hunger - Usa and the most unlike its peers is Artists Fellowship Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 36 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
78 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 78 of the 129 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR RAINFOREST NATIONS SECRETARIAT ↗
- Who funds WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GIVEDIRECTLY INC ↗
- Who funds THE CLEAR FUND ↗
- Who funds PANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds ROOM TO READ ↗
- Who funds KHAN ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds TERRAPRAXIS INC ↗
- Who funds Electronic Frontier Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds SCOLIOSIS RESEARCH SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds POPULATION CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds GOODWIN HOUSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNITED MITOCHONDRIAL DISEASE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds The Against Malaria Foundation ↗
- Who funds ACTION AGAINST HUNGER - USA ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR CARBON REMOVAL ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE SCIENCE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The George W Bauer Family Foundation · Community Foundation of New Jersey · Aetna Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Robert J Bauer Family Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Farmington River Watershed Association Inc — 69% of income from government
- Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution — 63% of income from government
- Save the Sound — 37% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc — 11% of income from government
- New Jersey Future Inc — 7% of income from government
- Mercy Learning Center of Bridgeport Inc — 4% of income from government
- Connecticut Public Broadcasting Inc — 3% of income from government
- Year Up Inc — 0% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Robert J Bauer Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Robert J Bauer 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.