Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Private foundation

The John Merck Fund

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.9M
Granted FY2022
2
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$1.9M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2022.

Environment$13MScience & Tech$4.1MHealth$3.8MCommunity Improvement$2.6MFood & Nutrition$1.4MPublic Benefit$1.0MEducation$790kCivil Rights$684kOther$0
02FY2022 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2022

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $26k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.9M
$1,862,165
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MERCK FAMILY FUND$1,862,165
CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION$26,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–21, $320k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TIDES CENTER: $45k → 10%THE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES: $125k → 14%THE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES: $100k → 14%THE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES: $50k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

ME
VT
NH
WA
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
PA
CT
RI
CA
CO
MO
KY
VA
MD
DE
NC
DC
LA
TX

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.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 7% of The John Merck Fund’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

The John Merck Fundlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 4.8% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$24M · 70 repeat orgs$4.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +53% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.

70 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2022, 68 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

70
54

Total granted

$24M
$4.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+53%
+29%

Still filing today

87%
74%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’19’20’21’22
EnvironmentEducationFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsScience & TechOther

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

  • RT
    Research Triangle Institute
    3× · 2019–2021 · $3.8M · revenue +45%
  • MF
    MERCK FAMILY FUND
    2× · 2019–2022 · $1.9M · revenue +252% · 32% of their budget
  • THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC
    3× · 2019–2021 · $1.3M · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • TF
    TOXIC-FREE FUTURE
    one grant, 2020 · $787k
  • VR
    VOTER REGISTRATION PROJECTgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $550k · revenue +35%
  • KT
    KITCHEN TABLE CAMPAIGNS
    one grant, 2019 · $350k · revenue 0% · 44% of their budget

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Fresh Energy

Shape and drive bold policy solutions to achieve equitable carbon-neutral economies.

Environment
2
Environmental League of Massachusetts Inc

The organization's mission is to advocate for policy that meets the scale and urgency of our environmental challenges. as a massachusetts-based organization that engages in advocacy across a full spectrum of climate, environmental, and…

Environment
3
Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy

The minnesota center for environmental advocacy is a nonprofit organization that uses law, science and research to protect minnesota's environment, its natural resources and the health of its people.

Environment
4
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
5
The Climate Group Inc

Climate group advances climate action by mobilizing business and government leadership to drive systemic decarbonization across energy, transport, and industry, while engaging the public through large-scale convenings and global platforms.…

Environment
6
Nw Energy Coalition

The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…

—
7
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
8
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
9
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
10
Climate Catalyst Inc

Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.

Environment
11
Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah

Heal utah's mission is to protect utah's environment and its people by promoting clean air, clean energy, and comprehensive solutions to radioactive and toxic waste.

Environment
12
Center for International Environmental Law Inc

To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…

International

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environment America Research and Policy Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Merck Family Fund. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyCommunity FoundationsImmigrant Worker SupportCommunity Arts CentersFaith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Affordable Housing Construc…Health Access Advocacy and …Local Food System Organizat…Environmental Conservation …
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 32 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%1%<5yr14%7%5–10yr19%18%10–20yr16%28%20–35yr13%27%35–55yr16%19%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%4%5–10yr19%17%10–20yr16%25%20–35yr13%16%35–55yr16%38%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.9%1/110
the rest of the field
13%
240,395/1,819,455

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.

05the grantee network

108 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. 108 of the 130 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
33
Early backer (in before they grew)
107/108
Grantees still filing
82/108
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

TOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS COALITION — $990,000 · EnvironmentTOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS CO…Acadia Center — $870,000 · EnvironmentAcadia CenterCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC — $852,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INCCOMING CLEAN INC — $805,600 · EnvironmentCOMING CLEAN INCCLEAN PRODUCTION ACTION INC — $802,400 · EnvironmentCLEAN PRODUCTION ACTION INCNEW ENGLAND GRASSROOTS ENVIRONMENT FUND INC — $703,000 · EnvironmentNEW ENGLAND GRASSROOTS ENVIRONMENT FUND INCDEFEND OUR HEALTH — $525,000 · Environment+42 more — $5,823,250 · Environment+42 moreMERCK FAMILY FUND — $1,872,165 · OtherMERCK FAMILY FUNDTOXIC-FREE FUTURE — $787,000 · OtherTOXIC-FREE FUTUREVIRGINIA ORGANIZING — $700,000 · OtherVIRGINIA ORGANIZINGVOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT — $550,000 · OtherVOTER REGISTRATION PROJECTNEW ENGLAND CLEAN ENERGY COUNCIL INSTITUTE — $500,000 · OtherNEW ENGLAND CLEAN ENERGY COUNCIL I…KITCHEN TABLE CAMPAIGNS — $350,000 · OtherHABITABLE — $320,000 · Other+44 more — $3,706,375 · Other+44 moreResearch Triangle Institute — $3,831,130 · Science & TechResearch Triang…+1 more — $7,500 · Science & TechTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC — $1,265,000 · Community ImprovementCOMMONWEALTH KITCHEN INC — $215,000 · Community ImprovementFRANKLIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $200,000 · Community ImprovementVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC — $153,750 · Community ImprovementALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT INC — $100,000 · Community ImprovementCOOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE INC — $90,000 · Community ImprovementMIGRANT JUSTICE INC — $265,000 · Food & NutritionMAINE ORGANIC FARMERS AND GARDENERS ASSOCIATION — $225,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD CONNECTS — $211,000 · Food & NutritionMaine Farmland Trust — $160,000 · Food & NutritionFARM FRESH RHODE ISLAND INC — $105,000 · Food & NutritionAMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST — $100,000 · Food & NutritionFAIR FOOD NETWORK INC — $100,000 · Food & Nutrition+2 more — $57,500 · Food & NutritionUNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE FOUNDATION INCORPORATED — $285,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $250,000 · EducationRed Tomato Inc — $157,500 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $155,000 · EducationGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY — $100,000 · EducationNATIONAL CAUCUS OF ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATORS — $65,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS FOUNDATION INC — $40,000 · Education+4 more — $62,000 · EducationVERMONT SUSTAINABLE JOBS FUND INC — $507,000 · EmploymentLOCAL ENTERPRISE ASSISTANCE FUND — $50,000 · Employment
Environment$11,371,250Other$8,785,540Science & Tech$3,838,630Community Improvement$2,023,750Food & Nutrition$1,223,500Education$1,114,500Employment$557,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetResearch Triangle Institute — $3,831,130 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMERCK FAMILY FUND — $1,872,165 over 2y, 32% of budgetTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC — $1,265,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetTOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS COALITION — $990,000 over 2y, 27% of budgetAcadia Center — $870,000 over 3y, 18% of budgetCONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC — $852,000 over 4y, 3.1% of budgetCOMING CLEAN INC — $805,600 over 3y, 17% of budgetCLEAN PRODUCTION ACTION INC — $802,400 over 3y, 18% of budgetNEW ENGLAND GRASSROOTS ENVIRONMENT FUND INC — $703,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetVOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT — $550,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetDEFEND OUR HEALTH — $525,000 over 3y, 19% of budgetVERMONT SUSTAINABLE JOBS FUND INC — $507,000 over 3y, 16% of budgetCLEAN WATER FUND — $350,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetKITCHEN TABLE CAMPAIGNS — $350,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetHABITABLE — $320,000 over 3y, 5.1% of budgetTOXICS ACTION CENTER INC — $305,000 over 3y, 13% of budgetNORTHEAST STATES FOR COORDINATED AIR USE MANAGEMENT INC — $302,000 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $300,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHEAST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIPS — $300,000 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE FOUNDATION INCORPORATED — $285,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $275,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ARC OF THE UNITED STATES — $275,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetMIGRANT JUSTICE INC — $265,000 over 3y, 16% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAVE THE SOUND — $250,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetREGULATORY ASSISTANCE PROJECT — $240,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $230,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetECOLOGY CENTER — $230,000 over 3y, 6.0% of budgetMAINE ORGANIC FARMERS AND GARDENERS ASSOCIATION — $225,000 over 3y, 4.5% of budgetNatural Resources Council of Maine Inc — $225,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetCOMMONWEALTH KITCHEN INC — $215,000 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetWest Harlem Environmental Action Inc — $215,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetFOOD CONNECTS — $211,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetVote Solar — $210,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetCERES INC — $200,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetFRANKLIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $200,000 over 3y, 3.6% of budgetGREEN ENERGY CONSUMERS ALLIANCE INC — $195,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE — $190,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetVERMONT PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH & EDUCATION FUND INC — $185,000 over 3y, 9.1% of budgetHEALTH CARE WITHOUT HARM — $177,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC — $160,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPLUG IN AMERICA — $160,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetMaine Farmland Trust — $160,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetRed Tomato Inc — $157,500 over 3y, 8.3% of budgetTIDES CENTER — $156,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK — $155,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC — $153,750 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetVERMONT ENERGY INVESTMENT CORPORATION — $150,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

Barr FoundationUnited States Energy …Maine Community Found…PatagoniaorgWindward FundThe Energy FoundationFreedom Together Foun…Merck Family FundThe McKnight Foundati…The Marisla FoundationImpactassetsincResources Legacy Fund
Barr FoundationMA48.3× affinity23 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Barr Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Maine Community Foundation Inc · Patagoniaorg · Windward Fund · The Energy Foundation · Freedom Together Foundation · Merck Family Fund · The McKnight Foundation · The Marisla Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Resources Legacy Fund

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 John Merck Fund 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 170%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Local Enterprise Assistance Fund — 100% of income from government
  • Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships — 100% of income from government
  • Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management Inc — 100% of income from government
  • New England Forestry Foundation Inc — 88% of income from government
  • Cooperative Development Institute Inc — 58% of income from government
  • Vermont Sustainable Jobs Fund Inc — 51% of income from government
  • Save the Sound — 37% of income from government
  • Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture Inc — 35% of income from government
  • Vermont Natural Resources Council Inc — 30% of income from government
  • University of Delaware — 30% of income from government
  • Franklin County Community Development Corporation — 22% of income from government
  • Food Connects — 15% of income from government
  • Vermont Energy Investment Corporation — 15% of income from government
  • Center for an Agricultural Economy Inc — 12% of income from government
  • Commonwealth Kitchen Inc — 9% of income from government
  • Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
  • Shelburne Farms — 3% of income from government
  • Connecticut Public Broadcasting Inc — 3% of income from government
  • Clean Energy States Alliance Inc — 2% of income from government
  • Artists for Humanity Inc — 2% of income from government
  • Greenroots Inc — 1% of income from government
  • National Consumer Law Center Inc — 1% of income from government
  • Springfield Partners for Community Action Inc — 0% of income from government
  • Community Labor United Inc — 0% of income from government
  • Ceres Inc — 0% of income from government
  • Energy Action Network Inc — 0% of income from government
  • Migrant Justice Inc — 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
17get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
6rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The John Merck Fund?

Find your warmest path to The John Merck Fund 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 130 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines