· Private foundation
The Barbro Osher Pro Suecia 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 $10k37 grants · $219k
- $10k–50k79 grants · $1.4M
- $50k–250k9 grants · $650k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $100,000 |
| PAIDEIA THE EUROPEAN INSTITUTE FOR JEWISH STUDIES IN SWEDEN | $100,000 |
| STIFTELSEN KULTURCENTRUM LJUSNARSBERG | $90,000 |
| AMERICAN SCANDINAVIAN FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $75,000 |
| STIFTELSEN ULRIKSDALS SLOTTSTEATER CONFIDENCE | $60,000 |
| MARGARET JENKINS DANCE COMPANY | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $40,000 |
| AMERICAN SWEDISH HISTORICAL MUSEUM | $40,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $40,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $40,000 |
| SWEDISH AMERICAN MUSEUM | $40,000 |
| THE AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE | $40,000 |
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 US giving — 37% of grant dollars ($9.1M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 63% that went abroad ($15M) is mapped below.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 84% of your 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
Beyond the US — 63% of all-years giving ($15M)
7 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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.
200 repeat relationships — 90 still active in FY2025, 110 since wound down; 34 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, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $676k 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
- TAThe American-Scandinavian Foundation9× · 2017–2025 · $891k · revenue +66%
- TATHE AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE6× · 2017–2025 · $340k · revenue +74%
- SASWEDISH AMERICAN MUSEUM ASSOCIATION OF CHICAGO7× · 2018–2025 · $280k · revenue +21%
Funded once
- NCNORDIC CENTER AT UC BERKELEYone grant, 2021 · $1.0M
- SSSCANDINAVIAN SCHOOLone grant, 2021 · $250k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $240k
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.
We believe opera is a uniquely compelling, entertaining and emotionally thrilling art form. our mission is to bring together growing audiences to experience opera's transformative power.
On the Boards' mission is to invest in leading contemporary performing artists near and far and connect them to a diverse range of communities interested in forward-thinking art and ideas.
The san francisco jazz organization (the organization) is a recognized international leader in jazz creation, presentation, and education. the organization explores the full spectrum of jazz, from the music's origins in the african…
The asian art museum celebrates, preserves, and promotes asian and asian american art and cultures for local and global audiences. we provide a dynamic forum for exchanging ideas, inviting collaboration, and fueling imagination to deepen…
Choral Music Performances: California Bach Society is a 30-voice chamber choir known for finely wrought interpretations of Renaissance and Baroque music, often accompanied by leading period instrumentalists. Each season, the choir performs…
Siff is a seattle-based 501(c)(3) arts nonprofit dedicated to the creation of vibrant experiences and spaces that champion film discovery and arts education.
Guided by artists, rooted in new mexico, site santa fe celebrates contemporary creative expression.
The only music festival in North America dedicated to Mozart, our mission embraces both performance of highest artistic excellence and cultivation of new potential audience, including young people to assure the future appreciation of great…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Francisco Symphony and the most unlike its peers is Battery Park City Parks Conservancy Corporation. 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 41 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
88 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. 88 of the 471 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 The American-Scandinavian Foundation ↗
- Who funds National Nordic Museum ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN SWEDISH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds SWEDISH AMERICAN MUSEUM ASSOCIATION OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN ACADEMY OF MUSIC INC ↗
- Who funds BETHANY COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO SYMPHONY ↗
- Who funds AUGUSTANA COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds BISHOP HILL HERITAGE ASSOCIATION ↗
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 William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · The Bernard Osher Foundation · Phyllis C Wattis Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Fleishhacker Foundation · The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts Inc · Margaret a Cargill Foundation · Ibm International Foundation · Norway House Foundation co Royal Norwegian Consulate General
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 The Barbro Osher Pro Suecia 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.
- World Learning Inc — 39% of income from government
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Worcester State Foundation Inc — 3% of income from government
- Portland State University Foundation — 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 The Barbro Osher Pro Suecia Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Barbro Osher Pro Suecia 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.