· Private foundation
Sullivan Family Foundation
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.
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 $10k13 grants · $16k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RESEARCHAMERICA | $75,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ALUMNI ASSOCIATION | $5,000 |
| GRADY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
| GEORGIA HISTORICAL SOCIETY | $2,500 |
| MISSISSIPPI BLUES FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
| HEROES SAINTS LEGENDS WESLEY | $1,250 |
| ATLANTA SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA | $1,000 |
| ATLANTA HISTORY CENTER | $650 |
| NATIONAL MUSEUM OF AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY | $500 |
| NATIONAL ACADEMY OF MEDICINE | $500 |
| MARTHA'S VINEYARD PLAYHOUSE | $250 |
| AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ARTS & SCIENCES | $250 |
| PHI BETA KAPPA SOCIETY | $85 |
| Individual grant recipient | $55 |
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, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 44% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +34% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
58 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 50 since wound down; 6 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, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
- RRESEARCHAMERICA5× · 2017–2025 · $231k · revenue +135%
- MCMOREHOUSE COLLEGE5× · 2017–2021 · $217k · revenue +69%
- MSMOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE3× · 2017–2019 · $40k · revenue +123%
Funded once
- AOASSOCIATION OF ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTERS INCone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -25%
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITYone grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +6%- NHNATIONAL HEALTH MUSEUMone grant, 2017 · $6k
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.
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,…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.
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 mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
Aacsb international provides quality assurance of business school programs, the latest in business education intelligence, thought leadership, and learning and development services.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
To advance anthropology as the science that studies humankind in all its aspects, through archeological, biological, ethnological, and linguistic research; and to further the professional interest of american anthropologist, including the…
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
To advance the practice of higher education attorneys for the benefit of the institutions they serve.
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…
Asco association promotes the common business interests of its members by: (1) advocating for policies that improve the quality of cancer care; (2) maintaining the highest standards of oncology medical care through programs supporting…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Grady Health Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is National Geographic 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 42 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) — 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 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.
71 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. 71 of the 133 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 RESEARCHAMERICA ↗
- Who funds MOREHOUSE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds The Sullivan Alliance ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION OF ACADEMIC HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds MOREHOUSE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds Fulton Leadership Academy ↗
- Who funds THE GRADY HEALTH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA ALUMNI ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds ROBERT W WOODRUFF ARTS CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE ARNOLD GOLD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD FILM SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN MEDICAL COLLEGES ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL BLACK NURSES ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Jonas Philanthropies Inc ↗
- Who funds THE HISTORYMAKERS ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD PLAYHOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds ATLANTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds The Winston School ↗
- Who funds THE GEORGE AND BARBARA BUSH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Georgia Historical Society ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
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: Georgia Power Foundation Inc · Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Georgiainc · Emory University · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Martha's Vineyard Bank Charitable Foundation Inc · The Coca-Cola Foundation Inc · Publix Super Markets Charities Inc · The Imlay Foundation Inc · THDF II Inc DBA The Home Depot Foundation & Homer Fund · United Way of Greater Atlanta Inc · The Community Foundation for Greater Atlanta Inc · The Robert Wood Johnson 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 Sullivan 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.
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Martha's Vineyard Preservation Trust Inc — 4% of income from government
- American Academy of Arts & Sciences — 3% of income from government
- Martha's Vineyard Community Services Inc — 3% of income from government
- Martha's Vineyard Playhouse Inc — 2% of income from government
- Martha's Vineyard Film Society Inc — 2% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project 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 Sullivan Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Sullivan 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.