Skip to content
The Casey & Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Casey & Family 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.

$2.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

64% of The Casey & Family Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Boston Foundation Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 8 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2024, the last year The Casey & Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 10 organizations, $2M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

10
’17
10
’18
12
’19
17
’20
15
’21
13
’22
11
’23
10
’24
8
’25

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

01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$28MHealth$5.0MEnvironment$3.4MPublic Benefit$2.2MEducation$1.7MInternational$1.5MScience & Tech$1.2MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.2MOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $160k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $900k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
$50,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$28M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$1,000,000
NEW VENTURE FUND$220,000
TIDES CENTER PROJECT$110,000
HEAD COUNT INC$100,000
GLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND$100,000
SOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE$75,000
FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND$75,000
GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL$70,000
CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION$50,000
Individual grant recipient$50,000
SILVERLINING$50,000
PROTEUS FUND$40,000
INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK$40,000
TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE$30,000
GROUNDSWELL INTERNATIONAL$30,000
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 (FY19–23, $715k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%TIDES CENTER: $20k → 10%PRIME COALITION INC: $500k → 8%INNOCENCE PROJECT: $45k → 17%INNOCENCE PROJECT: $40k → 17%INNOCENCE PROJECT: $40k → 17%THE BRIGID ALLIANCE: $50k → 17%INNOCENCE PROJECT: $20k → 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

MN
MI
NY
MA
OR
IN
PA
CA
CO
VA
MD
DE
NC
DC
AL
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.

26%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$13M · 26 repeat orgs$37M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +58% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call). Read against FY2024, 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

26
20

Total granted

$13M
$33M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+14%

Still filing today

69%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.7M 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
EnvironmentInternationalEducationCivil RightsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesOther
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

  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $1.0M · revenue +98%
  • S
    SILVERLINING
    5× · 2020–2024 · $550k · revenue +198%
  • CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $500k · revenue +113%

Funded once

  • MF
    MIT FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $15M
  • TV
    THE VELMA FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $15M
  • PI
    PRIME IMPACT FUND
    one grant, 2018 · $1.0M
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
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
2
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
3
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
4
Common Future

Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…

Community Improvement
5
American Flood Coalition Inc

To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.

Environment
6
International Biomedical Research Alliance

Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.

Health
7
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
8
Global Impact Investing Network Inc

The global impact investing network, inc. is dedicated to increasing the scale and effectiveness of impact investing to solve systemic problems facing people and the planet. impact investments are investments made into companies,…

Philanthropy
9
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
10
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
11
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
12
Upturn Inc

Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Prime Coalition Inc; the most unlike its peers is Indigenous Environmental Network. 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

47 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. 47 of the 70 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
47/47
Grantees still filing
30/47
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MIT FUND: $14,776,995 · OtherMIT FUNDTHE VELMA FUND: $14,776,954 · OtherTHE VELMA FUNDMIT CANCER RESEARCH FUND: $4,200,000 · OtherMIT CANCER RESEARCH FUNDIndividual grant recipient: $2,000,000 · Other+31 more: $6,655,958 · Other+31 moreBoston Foundation Inc: $7,955,750 · PhilanthropyBoston Foundation I…THE US CHARITABLE GIFT TRUST: $1,449,000 · PhilanthropyTHE US CHARITABLE G…SENTINEL BIO INC: $500,000 · Philanthropy+6 more: $578,847 · Philanthropy+6 moreMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $1,000,000 · InternationalCAMBRIDGE IN AMERICA: $945,000 · InternationalGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $495,000 · InternationalGroundswell International Inc: $310,000 · InternationalRURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION: $195,000 · InternationalNEW VENTURE FUND: $1,150,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $500,000 · EnvironmentGLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND: $300,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC: $180,000 · EnvironmentHEALTH CARE WITHOUT HARM: $145,000 · EnvironmentBlueGreen Alliance Inc: $90,000 · Environment+3 more: $125,000 · EnvironmentEFFECTIVE INSTITUTIONS PROJECT INC: $1,000,000 · Public BenefitPUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC: $450,000 · Public BenefitSOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE: $75,000 · Public BenefitAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $385,000 · EducationPROTEUS FUND INC: $380,000 · EducationTrustees of Tufts College: $335,000 · EducationINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $275,000 · EducationLightcone Infrastructure Inc: $100,000 · EducationPRIME COALITION INC: $500,000 · Human ServicesTHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $145,000 · Human ServicesTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $50,000 · Human Services+1 more: $20,000 · Human Services
Other$42,409,907Philanthropy$10,483,597International$2,945,000Environment$2,490,000Public Benefit$1,525,000Education$1,475,000Human Services$715,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBoston Foundation Inc: $7,955,750 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetTHE US CHARITABLE GIFT TRUST: $1,449,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $1,150,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $1,000,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCAMBRIDGE IN AMERICA: $945,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetSILVERLINING: $550,000 over 5y, 8.9% of budgetCENTER FOR APPLIED RATIONALITY: $500,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetPRIME COALITION INC: $500,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC: $500,000 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC: $495,000 over 8y, 1.0% of budgetPUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC: $450,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetAMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC: $385,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetPROTEUS FUND INC: $380,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetTrustees of Tufts College: $335,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetGroundswell International Inc: $310,000 over 7y, 2.0% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $300,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND: $300,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetDEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetINDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK: $275,000 over 6y, 1.7% of budgetRURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION: $195,000 over 4y, 5.3% of budgetNATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC: $180,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $165,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBERKELEY EXISTENTIAL RISK INITIATIVE: $160,000 over 1y, 9.6% of budgetHEALTH CARE WITHOUT HARM: $145,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetTHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $145,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetPINK FUND INC: $125,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetHEAD COUNT INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetLightcone Infrastructure Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Inc: $90,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetEXPECT MIRACLES FOUNDATION: $87,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetRAINFOREST FOUNDATION INC: $75,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetSOUTHERN VISION ALLIANCE: $75,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND: $75,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetABORTION CARE NETWORK: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetIFWHENHOW: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMACHINE INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOTHERS OUT FRONT INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetGrapevine giving foundation: $1,347 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.

  • Who funds Boston Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE US CHARITABLE GIFT TRUST ↗
  • Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
  • Who funds EFFECTIVE INSTITUTIONS PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds CAMBRIDGE IN AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds SILVERLINING ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR APPLIED RATIONALITY ↗
  • Who funds PRIME COALITION INC ↗
  • Who funds SENTINEL BIO INC ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds PUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC ↗
  • Who funds PROTEUS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
  • Who funds Groundswell International Inc ↗
  • Who funds HOPEWELL FUND ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL GREENGRANTS FUND ↗
  • Who funds DEMOCRACY FORWARD FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds INDIGENOUS ENVIRONMENTAL NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds RURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
  • Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds BERKELEY EXISTENTIAL RISK INITIATIVE ↗
  • Who funds HEALTH CARE WITHOUT HARM ↗
  • Who funds THE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds PINK FUND INC ↗

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Boston Foundation IncImpactassetsincRsf Social Finance IncFounders Pledge IncGood Ventures Foundat…Daffy Charitable FundThe Schmidt Family Fo…Community Foundation …Vanguard Charitable E…Greater Kansas City C…WK Kellogg Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA19.5× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · Impactassetsinc · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Founders Pledge Inc · Good Ventures Foundation · Daffy Charitable Fund · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Community Foundation for Southeast Michigan · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · WK Kellogg 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 Casey & Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Casey & Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 13%
  • Trustees of Tufts College: 13% of income from government
  • Boston Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 70 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 Casey & 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