· Private foundation
Stephen and Rosamund Forrest 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k25 grants · $39k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $166k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY MUSICAL SOCIETY | $66,000 |
| AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TECHNION- ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF | $10,000 |
| LYRIC OPERA OF CHICAGO | $7,500 |
| NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING FUND | $3,000 |
| MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC | $2,500 |
| FOOD GATHERERS | $2,000 |
| AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ARTS AND SCIENCES | $2,000 |
| THE CONCORD COMMUNITY MUSIC SCHOOL | $2,000 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY | $2,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN | $2,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED | $2,000 |
| NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES | $1,500 |
| HAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
| COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE I | $1,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 76% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
35 repeat relationships — 23 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
- UMUNIVERSITY MUSICAL SOCIETY8× · 2017–2024 · $429k · revenue +93%
- LOLyric Opera of Chicago4× · 2020–2024 · $17k · revenue +34%
- WCWildlife Conservation Society5× · 2018–2024 · $13k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- TATHE AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +68%
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $6k · revenue +43%
THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INCone grant, 2022 · $2k · revenue -14%
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.
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…
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
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…
Empowering financial professionals and consumers through world-class advocacy and education.
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
American foreign service association (afsa) is both the principal advocate for the long-term institutional wellbeing of the professional career foreign service and responsible for safeguarding the interest of afsa members. (continued on…
We empower directors and transform boards to be future ready.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Waterorg and the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Conservation Society. 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 55 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
41 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. 41 of the 48 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 UNIVERSITY MUSICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Lyric Opera of Chicago ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds HAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING FUND ↗
- Who funds CONCORD COMMUNITY MUSIC SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN INDIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY INC ↗
- Who funds Trinity Restoration Inc ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD GATHERERS ↗
- Who funds HEIFER INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ACADEMY IN ROME ↗
- Who funds New Hampshire Charitable Foundation ↗
- Who funds CLEAN ENERGY NH ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ARTS & SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds THE ARCHITECTURAL LEAGUE OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds WATERORG ↗
- Who funds AS 220 ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds CERES INC ↗
- Who funds US CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds NEW HAMPSHIRE CHILDREN'S TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Rape Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP ↗
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: New Hampshire Charitable Foundation · Madelaine G Vonweber Trust Todd Fahey & William Tucker Co-Trustees · Eastern Bank Foundation · Fidelity Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Stephen and Rosamund Forrest 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- American Academy of Arts & Sciences — 3% of income from government
- Ceres 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 Stephen and Rosamund Forrest Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Stephen and Rosamund Forrest 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.