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

· Private foundation

The Gunk 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.

$326k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$222k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Arts & Culture$742kEnvironment$149kCommunity Improvement$145kPhilanthropy$50kRecreation & Sports$46kCivil Rights$25kEducation$14kHuman Services$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $282k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$104k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CENTER FOR PHOTOGRAPHY AT WOODSTOCK$222,341
BLUE MARBLE PROJECTALEX MATTHIESSEN$60,000
BANK OF AMERICA CHARITABLE GIFT FUND$25,000
COLLAR WORKS$5,000
PHOTOWORK FOUNDATION$5,000
SCENIC HUDSON$5,000
WOMENS STUDIO WORKSHOP$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
STEVEN MYRON HOLL FOUNDATION$1,000
BYRDCLIFFE THEATRE COMPANY$800
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 (FY17–24, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%COLLAR WORKS: $6k → 11%COLLAR WORKS: $5k → 11%COLLAR WORKS: $5k → 11%COLLAR WORKS: $5k → 11%COLLAR WORKS: $5k → 11%COLLAR WORKS: $5k → 11%COLLAR WORKS: $1k → 11%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 26% of The Gunk Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 97% of the giving stays in NY; by stated purpose, 58%.

The Gunk Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 39% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 12 repeat orgs$97k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +134% since the first grant, against +91% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
14

Total granted

$1.1M
$88k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+134%
+91%

Still filing today

75%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k 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
Arts & CultureEnvironmentEducationRecreation & SportsCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsOther
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

  • CF
    CENTER FOR PHOTOGRAPHY AT WOODSTOCK
    5× · 2020–2024 · $687k · revenue +290%
  • OS
    OPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC
    2× · 2019–2021 · $45k · revenue +134%
  • CA
    CHAMPLAIN AREA TRAILS INC
    4× · 2018–2021 · $36k · revenue +382%

Funded once

  • RA
    RIDERS ALLIANCE FUND INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +47%
  • TS
    THE SCHERMAN FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +225%
  • REGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +54%
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
The Neue Galerie New York
Arts & Culture
2
The Nature Institute
—
3
Peace Islands Institute New York Inc
Religion
4
Innisfree Foundation Inc
—
5
Roger Shapiro Fund for New Music
Arts & Culture
6
Adk Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Brooklyn Inst of Arts & Sciences Trust
Philanthropy
8
Foundation for Research of the New York Academy of Osteopathy Inc
—
9
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
10
Berggruen Institute
Education
11
Constance Saltonstall Foundation for the Arts Inc
Unclassified
12
Kestrel Land Trust

Kestrel land trust conserves and cares for forests, farms, and riverways in the connecticut river valley of western massachusetts while nurturing an enduring love of the land

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Scenic Hudson Inc; the most unlike its peers is Nurture Nature Foundation. 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

23 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 23 of the 32 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)
12
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
15/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CENTER FOR PHOTOGRAPHY AT WOODSTOCK: $687,072 · Arts & CultureCENTER FOR PHOTOGRAPHY AT WOODSTOCK+4 more: $8,800 · Arts & CultureBLUE MARBLE PROJECT: $125,000 · OtherBLUE MARBLE PROJECTBLUE MARBLE PROJECTALEX MATTHIESSEN: $85,000 · OtherBLUE MARBLE PROJECTALEX MAT…THE SCHERMAN FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · OtherTHE SCHERMAN FOUNDATION INCREGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION INC: $20,000 · OtherREGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION I…+12 more: $31,700 · Other+12 moreOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC: $45,000 · EnvironmentNURTURE NATURE FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EnvironmentScenic Hudson Inc: $5,000 · Environment+2 more: $1,500 · EnvironmentCHAMPLAIN AREA TRAILS INC: $36,000 · Recreation & SportsParks & Trails New York Inc: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsCOLLAR WORKS INC: $32,000 · Human ServicesBANK OF AMERICA CHARITABLE GIFT FD: $25,000 · PhilanthropyPhotowork Foundation: $6,000 · PhilanthropyRIDERS ALLIANCE FUND INC: $25,000 · Civil Rights
Arts & Culture$695,872Other$286,700Environment$56,500Recreation & Sports$46,000Human Services$32,000Philanthropy$31,000Civil Rights$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 budgetCENTER FOR PHOTOGRAPHY AT WOODSTOCK: $687,072 over 5y, 19% of budgetOPEN SPACE INSTITUTE INC: $45,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCHAMPLAIN AREA TRAILS INC: $36,000 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetCOLLAR WORKS INC: $32,000 over 7y, 7.2% of budgetBANK OF AMERICA CHARITABLE GIFT FD: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRIDERS ALLIANCE FUND INC: $25,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetTHE SCHERMAN FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetREGIONAL PLAN ASSOCIATION INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetParks & Trails New York Inc: $10,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSCHOOL ONE: $8,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPhotowork Foundation: $6,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetNURTURE NATURE FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetScenic Hudson Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWESTOVER SCHOOL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWALLKILL VALLEY LAND TRUST: $3,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetWomen's Studio Workshop Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRONDOUT-ESOPUS LAND CONSERVANC: $1,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetSTEVEN MYRON HOLL FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetBYRDCLIFFE THEATRE COMPANY INC: $800 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetSUNY NEW PALTZ FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSUSTAINABLE HUDSON VALLEY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMOHONK CONSULTATIONS INC: $500 over 1y, 1.5% 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.

Open Space Institute …Ag FoundationCommunity Foundations…Novo FoundationIbm International Fou…Vanguard Charitable E…The Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Open Space Institute Land Trust IncNY15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Open Space Institute Land Trust Inc · Ag Foundation · Community Foundations of the Hudson Valley Inc · Novo Foundation · Ibm International Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Gunk Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Gunk Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 Gunk Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Gunk 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 32 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 Gunk’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