Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

The Baum Foundation

The mission of The Baum Foundation is to improve the quality of people's lives by supporting programs in the arts, education and the environment.

$38k
Granted FY2019
2
Grants FY2019
2
States reached
$26k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2019.

Environment$422kCommunity Improvement$19kSocial Science$17kArts & Culture$10kRecreation & Sports$10kScience & Tech$10kFood & Nutrition$8k
02FY2019 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 2 grants below total $35,816 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $37,516 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,700 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

$25,816
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Native Conservancy$25,816
The Aspen Institute$10,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 38% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Oceanic Society Expeditions: $7k → 8%The Hydrous: $19k → 10%5 Gyres Institute: $10k → 14%Environmental Defense Fund: $25k → 17%Ocean Doctor Inc: $30k → 14%Aspen Art Museum: $10k → 6%Rocky Mountain Institute: $10k → 12%Eyak Preservation Council: $50k → 7%The Kitchen Community: $8k → 10%The Aspen Institute: $10k → 14%Aspen Valley Ski-Snowboard Cl: $10k → 6%Native Conservancy: $26k → 7%Exploratorium: $10k → 10%The Aspen Institute: $7k → 14%Aspen Center for Environmenta: $7k → 6%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your field

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.

1
Schmidt Ocean Institute
Science & Tech
2
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
3
Earth & Space Research

Increase societal understanding of the earth system through scientific research and education.

Science & Tech
4
The Coral Reef and Marine Science Foundation Inc C/O James Bildner
—
5
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
6
Ocean Research and Educational
Science & Tech
7
Ocean Alliance Project

Protecting and promoting the marine biodiversity of Hawai'i through coral restoration, ecological monitoring, regenerative tourism, and cultural integration

Science & Tech
8
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
—
9
Clean Reefs
Environment
10
Ocean Genome Atlas Project

The Ocean Genome Atlas Project OGAP aims to collect, classify, sequence and map the genomic information of organisms representing at least 80 of the extant marine species worldwide. Deploying a fleet of advanced but cost effective research…

Science & Tech
11
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
12
Environment Now
—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is The 5 Gyres Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

16 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. 16 of the 17 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

OCEANELDERS INC — $127,000 · EnvironmentOCEANELDERS INCEyak Preservation Council dba Cultural Defense Fund — $50,000 · EnvironmentEyak Preservation Council dba Cultural Defense FundOCEAN DOCTOR INC — $30,032 · EnvironmentOCEAN DOCTOR INCGREEN FORESTS WORK INC — $30,000 · EnvironmentGREEN FORESTS WORK INCNATIVE CONSERVANCY — $25,816 · EnvironmentNATIVE CONSERVANCYENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $25,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED+1 more — $7,200 · EnvironmentSylvia Earle AllianceMission Blue — $100,000 · Science & TechSylvia Earle AllianceM…Aspen Valley Ski-Snowboard Cl — $10,000 · OtherRocky Mountain Institute — $10,000 · OtherThe 5 Gyres Institute — $10,000 · OtherOceanic Society Expeditions — $6,790 · OtherTHE EXPLORATORIUM — $10,000 · Arts & CultureASPEN ART MUSEUM — $10,000 · Arts & CultureTHE HYDROUS — $18,600 · Community ImprovementTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC — $16,600 · Social ScienceBig Green — $8,000 · Food & Nutrition
Environment$295,048Science & Tech$100,000Other$36,790Arts & Culture$20,000Community Improvement$18,600Social Science$16,600Food & Nutrition$8,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetSylvia Earle AllianceMission Blue — $100,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetEyak Preservation Council dba Cultural Defense Fund — $50,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetOCEAN DOCTOR INC — $30,032 over 1y, 13% of budgetGREEN FORESTS WORK INC — $30,000 over 1y, 9.1% of budgetNATIVE CONSERVANCY — $25,816 over 1y, 10% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HYDROUS — $18,600 over 1y, 6.5% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC — $16,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE EXPLORATORIUM — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe 5 Gyres Institute — $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetASPEN ART MUSEUM — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetASPEN CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES — $7,200 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetOceanic Society Expeditions — $6,790 over 1y, 0.3% of budget
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.

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA15× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 The Baum 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 17 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2020) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2019, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines