Skip to content
The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$125k
Granted FY2023
5
Grants FY2023
4
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $125k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

3
’17
2
’18
4
’19
3
’20
4
’21
4
’22
5
’23
4
’24
0
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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 2025.

Crime & Legal$745kPhilanthropy$735kCivil Rights$385kHealth$75kHuman Services$50kCommunity Improvement$50kPublic Benefit$40kInternational$30kOther$0
02FY2023 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$25,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE$25,000
A BETTER CHILDHOOD$25,000
TEXAS FAIR DEFENSE PROJECT$25,000
UPPER SEVEN LAW$25,000
RIGHTS BEHIND BARS$25,000
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 (FY21–23, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%RIGHTS BEHIND BARS: $25k → 14%ASSYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECTS: $50k → 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

WA
MT
MN
IL
NY
MA
OR
PA
CA
NE
NC
DC
AL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 39% of The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

24%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$345k · 5 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +155% since the first grant, against +84% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2023, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call). Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
24

Total granted

$345k
$955k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+155%
+84%

Still filing today

80%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 40% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $75k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Crime & LegalCivil RightsHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyEnvironmentOther
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

  • NC
    National Center for Youth Law
    2× · 2020–2022 · $100k · revenue +14%
  • NC
    NATIONAL CENTER FOR LAW AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $70k · revenue +155%
  • US
    UPPER SEVEN LAW
    2× · 2023–2024 · $50k · revenue +63%

Funded once

  • CL
    CHILDRENS LEGAL CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +590%
  • DR
    DISABILITY RIGHTS NEW YORK
    one grant, 2020 · $50k
  • GJ
    GENDER JUSTICEgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +102%
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
Equal Justice Center

The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…

Civil Rights
2
New Civil Liberties Alliance

Public interest legal activities

Arts & Culture
3
The Campaign Legal Center Inc

The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…

Crime & Legal
4
Nijc Nfp

The National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) is a leader in advancing immigrant rights through its unique strategy drawing on its legal services to promote legal reform through litigation, advocacy and strategic communications.

Crime & Legal
5
Colorado Legal Services

To provide meaningful access to high quality, civil legal services in the pursuit of justice for as many low income persons and members of vulnerable populations throughout colorado as possible.

Crime & Legal
6
Liberty Justice Center

To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…

Crime & Legal
7
National Employment Law Project

To build a just and inclusive economy where all workers have expansive rights and thrive in good jobs.

—
8
District of Columbia Access to Justice

Work with DC courts, private bar & legal services providers to increase legal representations for low & moderate income DC residents, enhance efficiency of legal services, and reduce barriers to the judicial system.

Crime & Legal
9
Legal Services Nyc

Legal services nyc is a non-profit organization that provides free civil legal assistance to low-income people in new york city. a community-based organization serving more than 100,000 people annually, lsnyc is the nation's largest…

Crime & Legal
10
Texas Immigration Law Council

It is the mission of the Texas Immigration Law Council to protect and promote the basic rights of immigrants and refugees of all nationalities within Texas.

Civil Rights
11
Volunteer Legal Advocates

To advocate for domestic violence victims, at-risk children, and other vulnerable individuals by providing over $22.8m in pro bono legal services, social service referrals, and on-going support; to train and support a strong network of…

Housing & Shelter
12
Legal Aid Justice Center

The legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Immigrant Rights Project; the most unlike its peers is Rights Behind Bars Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

26 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. 26 of the 36 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)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/26
Grantees still filing
21/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

National Center for Youth Law: $100,000 · OtherNational Center for Youth LawBAZELON CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH LA: $75,000 · OtherBAZELON CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH LADISABILITY RIGHTS NEW YORK: $50,000 · OtherDISABILITY RIGHTS NEW YORKNORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT: $50,000 · OtherNORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECTNATIONAL CENTER FOR LGBTQ RIGHTS FKA NATIONAL CENTER FOR LESBIAN RIGHTS: $50,000 · OtherNATIONAL CENTER FOR LGBTQ RIGHTS FKA NATION…NATIONAL CENTER FOR YOUTH LAWS: $50,000 · OtherNATIONAL CENTER FOR YOUTH LAWSUptown People's Law Center: $50,000 · OtherUptown People's Law CenterA BETTER CHILDHOOD INC: $50,000 · OtherA BETTER CHILDHOOD INCNATIONAL VETERANS LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM INC: $40,000 · OtherNORTH CAROLINA PRISONER LEGAL SERVI: $40,000 · OtherNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $40,000 · OtherPRISONER'S LEGAL SERVICES OF MASS: $30,000 · OtherNATL IMMIG PROJ OF NATL LAWYERS GUI: $30,000 · OtherAMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL: $30,000 · OtherCENTER FOR GENDER REFUGEE STUDIES: $30,000 · Other+4 more: $100,000 · Other+4 moreDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $685,280 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INCFUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK INC: $50,000 · PhilanthropyFUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK INCNATIONAL CENTER FOR LAW AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE INC: $70,000 · Crime & LegalNATIONAL CENTE…CHILDRENS LEGAL CENTER: $50,000 · Crime & LegalCHILDRENS LEGA…GENDER JUSTICE: $50,000 · Crime & LegalGENDER JUSTICETexas Fair Defense Project: $25,000 · Crime & LegalTexas Fair Def…LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $25,000 · Crime & LegalLONE STAR JUST…THE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER: $25,000 · Crime & LegalTHE PUBLIC INT…LEGAL SERVICES ALABAMA INC: $25,000 · Crime & LegalLEGAL SERVICES…UPPER SEVEN LAW: $50,000 · Civil RightsASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - AAJC INC: $50,000 · Civil RightsFair Elections Center: $40,000 · Civil RightsCHILDREN'S RIGHTS INC: $25,000 · Civil RightsASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesRIGHTS BEHIND BARS INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesNEW ECONOMY PROJECT INC: $50,000 · Community ImprovementOUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $25,000 · Environment
Other$815,000Philanthropy$735,280Crime & Legal$270,000Civil Rights$165,000Human Services$75,000Community Improvement$50,000Environment$25,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $685,280 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNational Center for Youth Law: $100,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR LAW AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE INC: $70,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetCHILDRENS LEGAL CENTER: $50,000 over 1y, 8.9% of budgetUPPER SEVEN LAW: $50,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetGENDER JUSTICE: $50,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetNEW ECONOMY PROJECT INC: $50,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - AAJC INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL CENTER FOR LGBTQ RIGHTS FKA NATIONAL CENTER FOR LESBIAN RIGHTS: $50,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetFUND FOR THE CITY OF NEW YORK INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUptown People's Law Center: $50,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetA BETTER CHILDHOOD INC: $50,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetASYLUM SEEKER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC: $50,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetFair Elections Center: $40,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetNATIONAL VETERANS LEGAL SERVICES PROGRAM INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNATIONAL WOMEN'S LAW CENTER: $40,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL: $30,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTexas Fair Defense Project: $25,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetLONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetOUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLEGAL SERVICES ALABAMA INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNATIONAL IMMIGRATION LITIGATION ALLIANCE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetCHILDREN'S RIGHTS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetRIGHTS BEHIND BARS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 4.4% 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 Impact FundEqual Justice WorksThe Skadden FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…Proteus Fund IncBorealis PhilanthropyThe Ford FoundationRockefeller Philanthr…National Philanthropi…The Blackbaud Giving …Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…
The Impact FundCA17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Impact Fund · Equal Justice Works · The Skadden Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Proteus Fund Inc · Borealis Philanthropy · The Ford Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to The Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman Foundation Inc 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.

    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 36 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Barbara McDowell and Gerald S Hartman’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