Skip to content
The Gama Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Gama 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.

$25k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

International$88kHealth$58kHuman Services$18kEducation$17kPhilanthropy$15kReligion$13kPublic Safety & Disaster$5k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$560k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$5,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$5,000
HOSPICE OF THE CHESAPEAKE$5,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$5,000
THE BLUE RIBBON PROJECT$2,500
CHRIST CHILD SOCIETY$2,000
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 (FY24–24, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%LITTLE ESSENTIALS: $2k → 20%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$192k · 7 repeat orgs$45k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +27% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
9

Total granted

$192k
$36k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
0%

Still filing today

71%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
InternationalCivil RightsEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyCrime & LegalOther
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
    6× · 2017–2025 · $93k · revenue +98%
  • HO
    HOSPICE OF THE CHESAPEAKE INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $48k · revenue +28%
  • NC
    NATIONAL CHRIST CHILD SOCIETY INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $12k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • US
    UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE
    one grant, 2021 · $8k
  • UO
    University of MD Hospital
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • TO
    The Oaks at Lakewood
    one grant, 2020 · $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
Children's Shelter of Cebu

We exist to glorify god by demonstrating his love to the philippines as we provide a loving, christ-centered home with comprehensive medical, educational and placement services for homeless filipino children.

International
2
Childrens House International

Children's house international provides ethical adoption services, child focused recruitment, and family support. we support disadvantaged children with humanitarian aid in countries worldwide.

—
3
Childserve Inc

We partner with families to help children with special health care needs live a great life.

—
4
United Children's Services of Bennington County Inc

Children's services

Human Services
5
Children's Home Society of North Carolina Inc

The Children's Home Society of North Carolina's mission is to promote the right of every child to a permanent, safe, and loving family.

Human Services
6
Choices Coordinated Care Solutions Inc

To strengthen youth and families while enhancing systems and communities.

Human Services
7
Crossnore Communities for Children

Crossnore communities for children champions the well being of children and families by fostering innovative change that weaves a fabric of resilience in homes, schools, and communities.

Health
8
Onechild Global

One child global's mission is to advocate for children in hard places and provide holistic care so they have hope and thrive. onechild global's 355 hope centers provide holistic child development progress in nineteen countries.

International
9
Children's Health Foundation

Children's health foundation (chf) supports children's health system (chs) and children's hospital of the king's daughters (chkd). chf is organized and operated to carry out the charitable, educational and scientific purposes of chs and…

Health
10
Family and Children's Service Inc of Monmouth County

Family and children's services provides compassionate care, intervention and education to support people during challenging times in their lives.

Human Services
11
Children in Conflict Inc

Vision: a world where no child's life is torn apart by war.children in conflict works tirelessly to restore hope, safety and childhoods to children whose lives are affected by war.

Human Services
12
Christel House International Inc

Chi prepares graduates of the christel house schools operated by its affiliated entities, which chi funds and oversees, to achieve upward economic mobility, demonstrate good citizenship, and become empowered to identify and realize their…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Christ Child Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is Educare Foundation Inc. 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

10 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. 10 of the 19 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HOSPICE OF THE CHESAPEAKE INC: $48,000 · OtherHOSPICE OF THE CHESAPEAKE INCCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR SVG: $15,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR SVGNATIONAL CHRIST CHILD SOCIETY INC: $12,000 · OtherNATIONAL CHRIST CHILD SOCIETY INCSVG FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherSVG FOUNDATIONUNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE: $7,500 · OtherUNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCEIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherUniversity of MD Hospital: $5,000 · OtherThe Oaks at Lakewood: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · Other+3 more: $5,500 · OtherMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $92,500 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,000 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropyEDUCARE FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 · EducationANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY CASA INC: $3,000 · Civil RightsThe Blue Ribbon Project: $2,500 · Crime & LegalLITTLE ESSENTIALS: $1,500 · Human Services
Other$118,000International$102,500Philanthropy$5,000Education$4,000Civil Rights$3,000Crime & Legal$2,500Human Services$1,500

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 budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $92,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHOSPICE OF THE CHESAPEAKE INC: $48,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL CHRIST CHILD SOCIETY INC: $12,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR ST VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetEDUCARE FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY CASA INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCHRIST CHILD SOCIETY INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLITTLE ESSENTIALS: $1,500 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Gama Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Gama Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    4get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 19 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 Gama’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