Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Carl J and Margot a Johnson 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.

$1.4M
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$753k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Religion$3.0MEducation$2.9MPhilanthropy$976kScience & Tech$390kHealth$332kEnvironment$228kFood & Nutrition$217kArts & Culture$145kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $151k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $488k
  • $250k+1 grant · $753k
$30,327
Median grant
7
States reached
$39M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Purdue University$753,000
Univ of Akron Foundation$206,644
Multiplication Network Ministries$155,990
Foundation Scotland$65,000
Pinky Swear Foundation$60,282
Yetsena Foundation$30,327
Stonebriar Comm Church$30,315
Aid For Women$30,315
Topeka High School Histrorical Fnd$25,000
IGM Orphanage Inc$20,000
Tyler's Light Inc$15,350
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 (FY18–25, $246k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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%Pinky Swear Foundation: $61k → 11%Pinky Swear Foundation: $60k → 11%Pinky Swear Foundation: $49k → 11%Pinky Swear Foundation: $30k → 11%Pinky Swear Foundation: $26k → 11%Pinky Swear Foundation: $10k → 11%Pinky Swear Foundation: $10k → 11%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

MN
IL
IN
OH
PA
CA
CO
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.4M · 18 repeat orgs$802k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
10

Total granted

$8.4M
$696k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+46%

Still filing today

56%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $106k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionPhilanthropyHealthEducationEnvironmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • MN
    MULTIPLICATION NETWORK MINISTRIES
    8× · 2017–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +34%
  • DC
    DOUGLAS COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
    4× · 2018–2021 · $744k · revenue +16%
  • TU
    THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON FOUNDATION
    3× · 2022–2025 · $406k · revenue +30%

Funded once

  • Purdue Research Foundation
    one grant, 2022 · $390k · revenue -8%
  • TP
    The Plano Conservancy For Historic Preservation I
    one grant, 2017 · $80k · revenue +21%
  • SB
    SOUTH BUTLER COMNTY LIBRARY
    one grant, 2017 · $75k
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
Dallas Seminary Foundation

To support the mission of Dallas Theological Seminary by offering charitable planned giving and other related services to friends of the Seminary.

Education
2
First United Methodist Church of Dallas Foundation

Support religious and charitable and educational undertakings of First United Methodist Church Dallas

Education
3
Episcopal Health Foundation

To advance the Kingdom of God with specific focus on human health and well-being, through grants, research and initiatives in support of the mission of the Episcopal Diocese of Texas.

Health
4
Downtown Dallas Inc Foundation

Downtown Dallas, Inc. Foundation is the charitable arm of Downtown Dallas, Inc. whose purpose is to help make the area in and around Downtown Dallas a more vibrant and livable place for both daytime and permanent residents by promoting the…

Community Improvement
5
Dow Company Foundation
Philanthropy
6
North Texas Christian Foundation

National Christian Foundation North Texas (NCFNT) was created to facilitate smarter Christian giving with sophisticated charitable techniques.

Philanthropy
7
Washburn University Foundation

The Foundation was created to assist in the promotion, development and enhancement of the financial resources for Washburn University of Topeka, as well as to receive and hold in trust any assets given in benefit of the University.

Education
8
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
9
Episcopal Foundation of Dallas

The foundation's mission is to strengthen and support faith communities by partnering wise investments with purposeful giving.

Religion
10
Dallas International University

As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.

Education
11
Pueblo Library Foundation

The organization is organized to perform functions of or to carryout the purposes of the Pueblo City-County Library District including providing resources for development maintenance and operation of the Pueblo City-County Library District…

Philanthropy
12
Parkland Foundation

Parkland Health Foundation secures substantial philanthropic investments to enable Parkland Healthto advance a national standard of excellence in public healthcare.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dallas Arboretum and Botanical Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is Tylers Light 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

16 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. 16 of the 33 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
12/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $2,150,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITYChina Ministries International Inc: $1,091,175 · OtherChina Ministries International IncFoundation Scotland: $505,000 · OtherFoundation ScotlandBOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEM: $386,793 · OtherBOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SYSTEMJust Food Douglas County: $217,283 · Other+17 more: $1,000,577 · Other+17 moreMULTIPLICATION NETWORK MINISTRIES: $1,290,666 · ReligionMULTIPLICATION NETWORK…CHINESE CHRISTIAN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $617,856 · ReligionCHINESE CHRISTIAN EDUC…DOUGLAS COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $743,788 · PhilanthropyDOUGLAS COUNTY …Douglas County Community Foundation: $535,769 · PhilanthropyDouglas County …+1 more: $20,000 · PhilanthropyTHE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON FOUNDATION: $406,137 · EducationTHE UNIVE…Purdue Research Foundation: $390,216 · EducationPurdue Re…PINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION: $245,947 · Human ServicesTYLERS LIGHT INC: $80,990 · HealthTexas Health Resources: $10,251 · HealthDALLAS ARBORETUM AND BOTANICAL SOCIETY INC: $91,090 · Environment
Other$5,350,828Religion$1,908,522Philanthropy$1,299,557Education$796,353Human Services$245,947Health$91,241Environment$91,090

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMULTIPLICATION NETWORK MINISTRIES: $1,290,666 over 8y, 3.9% of budgetChina Ministries International Inc: $1,091,175 over 6y, 32% of budgetDOUGLAS COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $743,788 over 4y, 6.0% of budgetCHINESE CHRISTIAN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $617,856 over 7y, 95% of budgetDouglas County Community Foundation: $535,769 over 5y, 67% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON FOUNDATION: $406,137 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetPurdue Research Foundation: $390,216 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION: $245,947 over 7y, 1.9% of budgetAID FOR WOMEN INC: $165,899 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetDALLAS ARBORETUM AND BOTANICAL SOCIETY INC: $91,090 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTYLERS LIGHT INC: $80,990 over 7y, 34% of budgetGreater Parker Foundation: $45,000 over 3y, 99% of budgetTexas Health Resources: $10,251 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF NORTHEAST TEXAS: $10,251 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds MULTIPLICATION NETWORK MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds China Ministries International Inc ↗
  • Who funds DOUGLAS COUNTY EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CHINESE CHRISTIAN EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Douglas County Community Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF AKRON FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Purdue Research Foundation ↗
  • Who funds PINKY SWEAR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds AID FOR WOMEN INC ↗
  • Who funds DALLAS ARBORETUM AND BOTANICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds TYLERS LIGHT INC ↗
  • Who funds The Plano Conservancy For Historic Preservation I ↗
  • Who funds Greater Parker Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE IGMORPHANAGE INC ↗
  • Who funds Texas Health Resources ↗
  • Who funds GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF NORTHEAST TEXAS ↗

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.

AbbVie FoundationIL11.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: AbbVie Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Carl J and Margot a Johnson Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Carl J and Margot a Johnson 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s 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 · 0–5%
    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 Carl J and Margot a Johnson Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Carl J and Margot a Johnson 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.

    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 33 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Carl J and Margot a Johnson’s filings →

    More from the funding graph