· Private foundation
The Emch 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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
97% of The Emch Foundation’s FY2023 grant dollars went to Bradley Impact Fund Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2020, the last year The Emch Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $62k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What it funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k3 grants · $11k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $51k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TEAM RUBICON | $31,000 |
| RED ARROW CAMP FOUNDATION INC | $20,000 |
| MAP INTERNATIONAL | $5,000 |
| SAINT FRANCIS SERVICE DOGS | $5,000 |
| HEAR WISCONSIN INC | $1,000 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Its human-services grants (FY17–21, $19k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 32% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
How this is measured
How this is measured
Where the work is directed
The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.
About 80% of The Emch Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.
How this is measured
Who it funds again
Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.
Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +66% since the first grant, against +53% for those funded once.
6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call). Read against FY2020, 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
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
How this is measured
Backed again, and grew
- TUTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION3× · 2017–2021 · $243k · revenue +66%
- TRTEAM RUBICON INC2× · 2017–2020 · $51k · revenue +18%
MAP International Inc2× · 2017–2020 · $25k · revenue +131%
Funded once
RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -34%- RARED ARROW CAMP FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +151%
- GDGlobal Distribution Fund Inc D-Prizegraduatedone grant, 2021 · $12k · revenue +53%
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.
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.
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
Devworks international is dedicated to a society where all people enjoy the freedom to pursue their own sustainable development. we contribute to this by strengthening the capacity of local organizations.
The arc prize foundation advances progress toward artificial general intelligence (agi) by creating public benchmarks, running competitions,and fostering a global research community. we educate students, researchers, and the broader public…
The uc santa barbara foundation actively works to further the goals of the university of california, santa barbara. the foundation seeks to maintain and nurture the university's quality and distinction. on behalf of the campus, the…
To improve and optimize access to medical imaging and radiology in low resource regions of the world for increasing radiology's contribution to global public health initiatives and patient care.
Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.
The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.
To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.
U.s. digital response is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that helps governments, nonprofits, and public entities respond quickly to critical public needs. the organization serves the public by leveraging a network of pro bono…
To promote, support and further the interests and purposes of the arc of the united states, inc.
Bridgespan's mission is to build a better world by strengthening the ability of mission-driven organizations and philanthropists to achieve breakthrough results in addressing society's most important challenges and opportunities.
To encourage individuals, corporations, foundations and donor governments to support the global fund, an international foundation focused on ending three of the world's most deadly infectious diseases.
How this is measured
9 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. 9 of the 10 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.
Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
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 BRADLEY IMPACT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TEAM RUBICON INC ↗
- Who funds RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MAP International Inc ↗
- Who funds RED ARROW CAMP FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SAINT FRANCIS SERVICE DOGS ↗
- Who funds Global Distribution Fund Inc D-Prize ↗
- Who funds HEAR Wisconsin 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.
Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
How this is measured
How much its grantees rely on government
Each dot is one organization The Emch Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Emch Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.
- Rutgers University Foundation: 0% of income from government
How this is measured
Play a game based on Emch’s filings →