· Private foundation
The Freeman Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k19 grants · $553k
- $50k–250k51 grants · $5.2M
- $250k+25 grants · $15M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE | $1,650,000 |
| INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION | $1,330,000 |
| VERMONT LAND TRUST | $1,225,000 |
| MAG AMERICA INC | $1,200,000 |
| HAWAII GOOD FOOD ALLIANCE | $1,032,350 |
| SAVE THE CHILDREN FEDERATION | $1,000,000 |
| NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF JAPAN-AMERICA SOCIETIES INCORPORATED | $711,280 |
| FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE | $650,000 |
| COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY WEATHERHEAD EAST ASIAN INSTITUTE | $569,541 |
| UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH | $556,182 |
| UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDAION - CENTER FOR ASIAN STUDIES | $455,700 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION | $433,725 |
| UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA | $391,116 |
| FIVE COLLEGES INC | $372,413 |
| PRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT | $363,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY23–24, $2.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 96% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +17% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
84 repeat relationships — 46 still active in FY2024, 38 since wound down; 31 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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 FY2024, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.5M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
VERMONT LAND TRUST INC2× · 2023–2024 · $3.6M · revenue +18%- FNFIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE2× · 2023–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +138%
MAG AMERICA INC2× · 2023–2024 · $2.4M · revenue +11%
Funded once
- TTThe Trust for Public Land (THE TRUS)one grant, 2021 · $2.6M
- STSave the Children Federationone grant, 2022 · $1.0M
- CUColumbia Univ Weatherhead East Asian Instone grant, 2022 · $623k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
Rooted in the liberal arts & sciences & lutheran expression of the christian faith, & is committed to offering a challenging education that develops qualities of mind, spirit, & body necessary for a rewarding life of leadership & service…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…
A diverse and sustainable learning community dedicated to discovery and excellence in teaching, scholarship and practice, pacific university inspires students to think, care, create and pursue justice in our world.
As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Oregon Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Blakemore Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 50 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
80 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 80 of the 197 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds VERMONT LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds HAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds MAG AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF JAPAN-AMERICA SOCIETIES INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds Hawaii Good Food Alliance ↗
- Who funds PRESERVATION TRUST OF VERMONT INC ↗
- Who funds FIVE COLLEGES INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR AN AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY INC ↗
- Who funds EAST-WEST CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE FOR EVERY STUDENT INC ↗
- Who funds SHELBURNE FARMS ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Atherton Family Foundation · McInerny Foundation-- · J Watumull Fund · First Insurance Company of Hawaii Charitable Foundation · Tradewind Group Foundation · Aloha United Way Inc · Central Pacific Bank Foundation · Bank of Hawaii Charitable Fdn · The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation Inc · Sasakawa Peace Foundation USA Inc · The Dods Foundation · Castiglione A Casauria Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Freeman Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Vermont Land Trust Inc — 42% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Preservation Trust of Vermont Inc — 29% of income from government
- Delaware Community Foundation Inc — 13% of income from government
- Center for an Agricultural Economy Inc — 12% of income from government
- Five Colleges Incorporated — 3% of income from government
- St Johnsbury Academy — 3% of income from government
- Shelburne Farms — 3% of income from government
- Endicott College — 1% of income from government
- Saint Michael's College — 0% of income from government
- Champlain College Incorporated — 0% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Freeman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Freeman 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.