Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Christina and Robert Dow 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.

$18M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$12M
Largest
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$81MPhilanthropy$5.3MHealth$1.0MYouth Development$200kHousing & Shelter$75kCrime & Legal$40kEducation$33kCommunity Improvement$8kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$12,426,573
Median grant
2
States reached
$199M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHRISTINA SEIX ACADEMY$12,426,573
VANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM$5,250,000
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 (FY18–19, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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%CHARLES DECKER FOUNDATION: $10k → 17%CHARLES DECKER FOUNDATION: $3k → 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.
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$82M · 17 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 16 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
4

Total granted

$82M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+1003707%

Still filing today

59%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesHealthFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • HOMEFRONT INC
    6× · 2017–2023 · $60k · revenue +62%
  • CF
    Children's Futures Inc
    3× · 2017–2019 · $25k · revenue +37%
  • ISLES INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $15k · revenue +31%

Funded once

  • WC
    WILLIAMS CANCER FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $1.0M
  • TL
    THE LINDSAY DOW CHARITABLE GIVING FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $100k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
Childfund International Usa

Childfund's mission is to help deprived, excluded and vulnerable children have the capacity to become young adults, parents and leaders who bring lasting and positive change to their communities, and to promote societies whose individuals…

International
2
Classical Academy Charter School of Clifton Inc

The classical academy charter school of clifton's (the "charter school") mission is to blend core traditional learning foundations and modern day educational initiatives to create a progressive learning environment. through the fusion of a…

Education
3
The Children's Aid Society

Children's aid helps children in poverty to succeed and thrive. we do this by providing comprehensive supports to children and their families in targeted, high-needs new york city neighborhoods. (continued on schedule o)continuation of…

Human Services
4
Catholic Charities of Staten Island Inc

Catholic charities of staten island (formerly known as mission of the immaculate virgin for the protection of homeless and destitute children) is a not-for-profit agency of the archdiocese of new york. founded in 1871 by father john c.…

Human Services
5
Forestdale Inc

Forestdale's mission is to ensure that children have the assets they need to thrive.

Human Services
6
Lantern Community Services Inc

Lantern community services' mission is to champion the independence and well-being of people who are impacted by or threatened with homelessness.

Housing & Shelter
7
Port Chester Carver Center Inc

Port chester carver center helps our community thrive through programs that nourish, educate, and empower.

Human Services
8
Children's Friend and Service

The mission of children's friend and service (the organization) is to be the innovative leader in improving the well-being and healthy development of rhode island's most vulnerable young children. they accomplish this by providing flexible…

Human Services
9
The Friends of Crown Heights Educational Centers Inc

To provide a safe, affordable and comprehensive program of high-quality early childhood education, parental and family support, as well as academic enrichment and recreational programs.

Human Services
10
Liberty Science Center

To inspire the next generation of scientists and engineers and excite learners of all ages about the power, promise, and pure fun of science and technology.lsc offers exceptional science learning onsite, offsite, and online as well as…

Arts & Culture
11
Jersey City Community Charter School

The mission of jersey city community charter school (jcccs) is to provide each student with innovative learning experiences that develop positive intellectual, social, and physical outcomes. jcccs is focused on promoting self-directed,…

Education
12
Ingenuity Prep

Ingenuity prep public charter school was formed to prepare students to succeed in college and beyond as impactful civiic leaders.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Homefront Inc; the most unlike its peers is Williams Cancer Foundation. 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

13 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. 13 of the 22 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHRISTINA SEIX ACADEMY: $81,348,318 · EducationCHRISTINA SEIX ACADEMY+1 more: $60,000 · EducationVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $5,250,000 · PhilanthropyWILLIAMS CANCER FOUNDATION: $1,000,000 · OtherPETER WESTBROOK FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 · OtherTHE LINDSAY DOW CHARITABLE GIVING FUND: $100,000 · Other+10 more: $104,500 · OtherChildren's Futures Inc: $25,000 · HealthCHARLES E DECKER FOUNDATION: $12,500 · Human ServicesCAL FARLEY'S BOYS RANCH: $10,000 · Human ServicesISLES INC: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterSHILOH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP: $7,500 · Community ImprovementTASK Inc Trenton Area Soup Kitchen Inc: $3,000 · Food & Nutrition
Education$81,408,318Philanthropy$5,250,000Other$1,404,500Health$25,000Human Services$22,500Housing & Shelter$15,000Community Improvement$7,500Food & Nutrition$3,000

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 budgetCHRISTINA SEIX ACADEMY: $81,348,318 over 8y, 99% of budgetVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $5,250,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPETER WESTBROOK FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 over 2y, 23% of budgetHOMEFRONT INC: $60,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetChildren's Futures Inc: $25,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetISLES INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE OLIVER SCHOLARS PROGRAM INC: $12,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCAL FARLEY'S BOYS RANCH: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSHILOH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP: $7,500 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTASK Inc Trenton Area Soup Kitchen Inc: $3,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetLawrenceville Main Street: $500 over 1y, 0.8% 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 CHRISTINA SEIX ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds VANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM ↗
  • Who funds WILLIAMS CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds PETER WESTBROOK FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HOMEFRONT INC ↗
  • Who funds Children's Futures Inc ↗
  • Who funds ISLES INC ↗
  • Who funds CHARLES E DECKER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE OLIVER SCHOLARS PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds CAL FARLEY'S BOYS RANCH ↗
  • Who funds SHILOH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP ↗
  • Who funds TASK Inc Trenton Area Soup Kitchen Inc ↗
  • Who funds Lawrenceville Main Street ↗

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA8.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Christina and Robert Dow Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Christina and Robert Dow Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 21%
  • Children's Futures Inc: 46% of income from government
  • Isles Inc: 21% of income from government
  • Homefront Inc: 9% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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
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 Christina and Robert Dow Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Christina and Robert Dow 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 22 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 Christina and Robert Dow’s filings →

More from the funding graph