Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Dana Home Foundation Inc

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.

$322k
Granted FY2025still arriving
23
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% 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$678kHealth$439kHousing & Shelter$203kRecreation & Sports$198kFood & Nutrition$130kArts & Culture$109kReligion$58kEducation$39kOther$0
02FY2025 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k13 grants · $58k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $163k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
$6,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LEXHAB$50,000
LEXINGTON FOOD PANTRY$50,000
MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES$45,000
COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES$25,000
BOSTON AREA GLEANERS$25,000
SUPPORTIVE LIVINGWELLNESS CENTER$20,000
LEXINGTON RECREATION AND COMMUNITY$17,100
Individual grant recipient$11,160
MEDFORD VISITING NURSING ASSOCIATION DBA VISITING NURSE AND COMMUNITY CARE$10,000
MINUTE MAN REGIONAL VOCATIONAL$10,000
DAOYIN HEALTH SOCIETY$8,000
CHINESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF LEXINGTON$6,000
FOLLEN CHURCH$6,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
LEXINGTON HUMAN SERVICES$5,000
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 (FY17–25, $649k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES: $27k → 7%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES: $25k → 7%BOSTON CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING: $5k → 16%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $60k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $60k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $60k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $60k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $50k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $50k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $50k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $50k → 8%SYMMES LIFE CARE INC: $5k → 8%MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES: $45k → 8%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES INC: $25k → 8%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES INC: $15k → 8%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES INC: $13k → 8%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES INC: $12k → 8%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES INC: $8k → 8%CHINESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF LEXINGTON: $6k → 8%CHINESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF LEXINGTON: $5k → 8%COOPERATIVE ELDER SERVICES INC: $3k → 8%THE POWER OF FLOWERS PROJECT: $10k → 8%THE POWER OF FLOWERS PROJECT: $5k → 8%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 20% of The Dana Home Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in MA; by stated purpose, 80%.

The Dana Home Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 36 repeat orgs$233k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +31% since the first grant, against +28% for those funded once.

36 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

36
14

Total granted

$2.0M
$161k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+28%

Still filing today

44%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $72k 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
Human ServicesHealthArts & CultureFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterEducationOther
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

  • MS
    MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $485k · revenue +106%
  • BOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $79k · revenue +17%
  • DH
    DAOYIN HEALTH SOCIETY
    5× · 2017–2025 · $52k · revenue +43% · 100% of their budget

Funded once

  • LH
    LEXINGTON HOUSING ASSITANCE BOARD
    one grant, 2020 · $50k
  • TO
    TOWN OF LEXINGTON FIRE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2019 · $18k
  • FP
    FOOD PANTRY
    one grant, 2020 · $17k
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
Visiting Nurse & Community Health Inc

We are committed to providing the highest quality, compassionate home care to the patients entrusted to us. We are also steadfast in our pledge to be a responsive and innovative advocate for the communities we serve, focusing on health…

—
2
Assisted Living Center Inc

Provide assisted living facilities for low to moderate income elders.

Housing & Shelter
3
Boston Senior Home Care Inc

Boston senior home care is committed to ensuring that culturally diverse adults and individuals with disabilities, particularly those of limited means, can remain safely in their homes and community with dignity and independence.

—
4
Greater Boston Chinese Golden Age Center

To promote the general welfare and independence of asian elders via a network of culturally sensitive and linguistically appropriate programs and services.

Human Services
5
Coastline Elderly Services Inc

Enhance the lives of seniors, caregivers and those with similar needs by assisting them to remain independent through a range of quality services.

Human Services
6
Central Boston Elder Services Inc

To provide home care services, referrals and advocacy to the elderly population located in the boston area.

Human Services
7
Berkeley Retirement Home Inc

None

—
8
Bristol Aging & Wellness Inc

Founded in 1973, bristol aging & wellness, inc. is a private non-profit corporation, designated as an aging services access point and an area agency on aging. bristol serves as the entry point for elder services in southeastern…

Human Services
9
Lifepath Inc

Lifepath, inc. is a private non-profit organization, designated aging services access point and an area agency on aging. its mission is to help elders live at home safely and independently for as long as possible by providing assistance…

Human Services
10
Northeast Kingdom Council on Aging Inc

We support people age 60 and older persons with disabilities in their efforts to remain active healthy, financially secure, and in control of their own lives. The Agency connects people and the services they they need to live independently…

Human Services
11
Seniorcare Inc

Seniorcare, inc. is a consumer centered organization that provides and coordinates services to elders and others, enabling them to live independently at home or in a setting of their choice while remaining part of their community.

Human Services
12
Massachusetts Assisted Living Association Inc

To lead the assisted living industry in its service of seniors through advocacy, education, operational support, and enhanced growth opportunities.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boston Center for Independent Living Inc; the most unlike its peers is Daoyin Health Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 55 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)
20/20
Grantees still filing
15/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LEXHAB: $230,000 · OtherLEXHABSUPPORTIVE LIVINGWELLNESS CENTER: $144,800 · OtherSUPPORTIVE LIVINGWELLNESS CENTERLEXINGTON RECREATION AND COMMUNITY: $103,140 · OtherLEXINGTON RECREATION AND COMMUNITYTOWN OF LEXINGTON RECREATION DEPT: $76,725 · OtherTOWN OF LEXINGTON RECREATION DEPTTOWN OF LEXINGTON HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT: $56,725 · OtherLEXINGTON HOUSING ASSITANCE BOARD: $50,000 · OtherLEXINGTON FOOD PANTRY: $50,000 · OtherCARY MEMORIAL LIBRARY: $46,160 · Other+31 more: $514,286 · Other+31 moreMINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES INC: $485,000 · Human ServicesMINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES INCCooperative Elder Services Inc: $127,600 · Human ServicesCooperative Elder Services Inc+4 more: $36,000 · Human Services+4 moreBOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC: $79,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD LINK INC: $47,200 · Food & NutritionDAOYIN HEALTH SOCIETY: $51,560 · HealthMedford Visiting Nurse Association Inc: $27,000 · HealthALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $3,000 · HealthLEXINGTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $41,000 · Arts & CultureTHE LEXINGTON CHAMBER MUSIC CENTER INC: $20,500 · Arts & CultureNEW LEGACY CULTURAL CENTER INC: $3,000 · Arts & CultureYouville Place Inc: $30,000 · Housing & ShelterPERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND: $25,000 · Education
Other$1,271,836Human Services$648,600Food & Nutrition$126,200Health$81,560Arts & Culture$64,500Housing & Shelter$30,000Education$25,000

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 budgetMINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES INC: $485,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetCooperative Elder Services Inc: $127,600 over 8y, 1.3% of budgetBOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC: $79,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetDAOYIN HEALTH SOCIETY: $51,560 over 5y, 100% of budgetFOOD LINK INC: $47,200 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetLEXINGTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $41,000 over 4y, 3.1% of budgetARC MASSACHUSETTS INC: $36,967 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetLexington Symphony Inc: $33,650 over 5y, 3.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONNECTION INC: $33,400 over 6y, 3.3% of budgetYouville Place Inc: $30,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetMedford Visiting Nurse Association Inc: $27,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND: $25,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LEXINGTON CHAMBER MUSIC CENTER INC: $20,500 over 3y, 7.4% of budgetNeighbor Brigade Inc: $16,000 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetPOWER OF FLOWERS PROJECT: $15,000 over 2y, 8.6% of budgetCHINESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF LEXINGTON INC: $11,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetSYMMES LIFE CARE INC D/B/A BROOKHAVEN AT LEXINGTON: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOSTON CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW LEGACY CULTURAL CENTER INC: $3,000 over 1y, 2.8% 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 MINUTEMAN SENIOR SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds Cooperative Elder Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds BOSTON AREA GLEANERS INC ↗
  • Who funds DAOYIN HEALTH SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds FOOD LINK INC ↗
  • Who funds LEXINGTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds ARC MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
  • Who funds Lexington Symphony Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONNECTION INC ↗
  • Who funds Youville Place Inc ↗
  • Who funds Medford Visiting Nurse Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds PERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND ↗
  • Who funds THE LEXINGTON CHAMBER MUSIC CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Neighbor Brigade Inc ↗
  • Who funds POWER OF FLOWERS PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds CHINESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF LEXINGTON 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.

Boston Foundation IncMA22.6× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boston Foundation Inc · Community Foundation for MetroWest Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Middlesex Savings Charitable Foundation Inc · Cambridge Savings Charitable Foundation Inc · Cummings Foundation Grants Inc (Fka Oneworld Boston Inc) · Ciccolo Family Foundation Inc · Greater Lowell Community Foundation Inc · Amelia Peabody Charitable Fund Trust · Point32health Foundation Inc · Salem Five Charitable Foundation Inc · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston 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 Dana Home Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Dana Home Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 70%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Arc Massachusetts Inc: 100% of income from government
  • Minuteman Senior Services Inc: 73% of income from government
  • Cooperative Elder Services Inc: 36% of income from government
  • Boston Area Gleaners Inc: 20% of income from government
  • Food Link Inc: 9% of income from government
  • Perkins School for the Blind: 7% of income from government
  • The Nature Connection Inc: 5% of income from government
  • Youville Place Inc: 3% of income from government
  • Chinese American Association of Lexington Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Lexington Historical Society: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
7get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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 Dana Home Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Dana Home Foundation Inc 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 55 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 Dana Home’s filings →

More from the funding graph