Skip to content
The Bowman Family Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Bowman 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.

$313k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Health$445kEducation$49kPublic Safety & Disaster$7kCrime & Legal$6kEnvironment$3k
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k9 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $143k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $160k
$2,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$4.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BRAINFUTURES INCORPORATED$100,000
INSEPARABLE INC$60,000
MASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH$48,833
COMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE$25,000
MINDFUL PHILANTHROPY INC$25,000
TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA$21,610
COMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE$12,500
SHATTERPROOF A NONPROFIT CORP$10,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION$2,000
THE JED FOUNDATION$1,500
WILLIAMS COLLEGE$1,000
BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC$1,000
THE JED FOUNDATION$1,000
SCARSDALE VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE CORPS INC$1,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 70% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%WILLIAMS COLLEGE: $1k → 12%BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $1k → 16%MINDFUL PHILANTHROPY INC: $25k → 22%one mind institute: $1k → 9%VILLAGE OF SCARSDALE: $4k → 9%THE JED FOUNDATION: $3k → 17%MEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS: $75k → 14%INSEPARABLE INC: $60k → 14%SHATTERPROOF A NONPROFIT CORP: $3k → 9%YALE UNIVERSITY: $1k → 12%TREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER: $5k → 7%BRAINFUTURES INCORPORATED: $100k → 11%WILLIAMS COLLEGE: $1k → 12%MASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH: $49k → 16%TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $22k → 22%JCC OF MID WESTCHESTER INC: $3k → 9%NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS OF NEW YORK CI: $2k → 17%COMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE: $25k → 14%BRAINFUTURES INCORPORATED: $25k → 11%WILLIAMS COLLEGE: $1k → 12%TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $22k → 22%VILLAGE OF SCARSDALE: $2k → 9%THE JED FOUNDATION: $2k → 17%COMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE: $13k → 14%WILLIAMS COLLEGE: $1k → 12%TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA - PENN: $12k → 22%VILLAGE OF SCARSDALE: $2k → 9%THE JED FOUNDATION: $1k → 17%COMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE: $10k → 14%WILLIAMS COLLEGE: $1k → 12%VILLAGE OF SCARSDALE: $2k → 9%AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION: $2k → 17%SCARSDALE VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE CORPS INC: $1k → 9%HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY FUND INC: $250 → 17%SCARSDALE VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE CORPS INC: $1k → 9%NORTHEAST BUSINESS GROUP ON HEALTH INC: $24k → 17%SCARSDALE VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE CORPS INC: $1k → 9%BLYTHEDALE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $250 → 9%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

NY
MA
PA
CT
CA
VA
MD
DC
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

45%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$208k · 7 repeat orgs$259k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
8

Total granted

$208k
$121k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-4%
+17%

Still filing today

86%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $137k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationOther
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

  • BI
    BRAINFUTURES INCORPORATED
    2× · 2021–2024 · $125k · revenue +147%
  • CC
    COMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE
    2× · 2023–2024 · $48k · revenue -88%
  • SA
    SHATTERPROOF A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    2× · 2022–2024 · $13k · revenue -4%

Funded once

  • MM
    MEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXASgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $75k · revenue +242%
  • NB
    NORTHEAST BUSINESS GROUP ON HEALTH INC
    one grant, 2020 · $24k · revenue +15%
  • TO
    TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA - PENN
    one grant, 2022 · $12k
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
University of Maryland Anesthesiology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
2
University of Maryland Neurology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
3
University of Maryland Physicians Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
4
University of Maryland Neurosurgeryassociates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Education
5
University of Maryland Pediatric Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Health
6
University of Maryland Family Medicine Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
7
Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
8
Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
9
University of Maryland Emergency Medicine Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Health
10
University of Maryland Facultyphysicians Inc

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland, school of medicine, administrative support services are provided to the physician practices of the university of maryland, including but not limited to information technology,…

Health
11
University of Maryland Eye Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Health
12
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Massachusetts Association for Mental Health Inc; the most unlike its peers is Scarsdale Volunteer Ambulance Corps Inc. 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

19 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. 19 of the 23 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
11/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BRAINFUTURES INCORPORATED: $125,000 · HealthBRAINFUTURES INCORPORATEDMEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS: $75,000 · HealthMEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXASInseparable Inc: $60,000 · HealthInseparable IncCOMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE: $47,500 · HealthCOMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTEMINDFUL PHILANTHROPY INC: $25,000 · HealthMINDFUL PHILANTHROPY INCSHATTERPROOF A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $12,500 · Health+7 more: $14,500 · HealthMASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH INC: $48,833 · OtherMASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIAT…NORTHEAST BUSINESS GROUP ON HEALTH INC: $23,500 · OtherNORTHEAST BUSINESS GRO…TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA - PENN: $11,610 · OtherTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVER…Individual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recip…+4 more: $8,250 · Other+4 moreTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $43,220 · EducationTRUSTEES O…Williams College: $5,000 · EducationWilliams C…
Health$359,500Other$102,193Education$48,220

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 budgetBRAINFUTURES INCORPORATED: $125,000 over 2y, 4.8% of budgetMEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS: $75,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetInseparable Inc: $60,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH INC: $48,833 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY COALITIONS HEALTH INSTITUTE: $47,500 over 2y, 9.4% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $43,220 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMINDFUL PHILANTHROPY INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetNORTHEAST BUSINESS GROUP ON HEALTH INC: $23,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetSHATTERPROOF A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $12,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE JED FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWilliams College: $5,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSCARSDALE VOLUNTEER AMBULANCE CORPS INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS OF NEW YORK CITY INC: $1,750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetONE MIND: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLYTHEDALE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Hospital for Special Surgery Fund Inc: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Goodness Web Foun…The Goldman Sachs Cha…Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Goodness Web FoundationMA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Goodness Web Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Bowman Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Bowman Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc: 6% of income from government
  • Shatterproof a Nonprofit Corporation: 2% of income from government
  • Williams College: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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.

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 23 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bowman Family’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