· Private foundation
The Marshmere 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.
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
- Under $10k4 grants · $230
- $10k–50k2 grants · $37k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $178k
- $250k+5 grants · $2.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GRAHAM WINDHAM SERVICES | $1,250,000 |
| POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL | $250,008 |
| ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE | $250,000 |
| ACUMEN FUND INC | $250,000 |
| INTEGRATE HEALTH | $250,000 |
| MAIN SPRING | $100,000 |
| IDAHO STATE UNIVERSITY | $78,125 |
| HARMONY PROGRAM | $25,000 |
| THE PHILANTHROPY WORKSHOP | $12,000 |
| THRU CD&R FUND X ADVISOR ENERGY A LP | $168 |
| THRU CD&R FUND X ADVISOR ORANGE A LP | $35 |
| THRU CD&R FUND XI ADVISOR AIV A LP | $26 |
| THRU CD&R FUND X ADVISOR WATERWORKS A LP | $1 |
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 (FY17–22, $1.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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.
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 +58% since the first grant, against -26% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 4 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, 26% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.8M 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
ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI5× · 2017–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +58%- GWGRAHAM WINDHAM5× · 2017–2022 · $1.8M · revenue +27%
- RRROUNDUP RIVER RANCH2× · 2017–2020 · $250k · revenue +73%
Funded once
- UCUNITARIAN CHURCH OF ALL SOULSone grant, 2020 · $1.0M
- IDINCOMM DIGITAL SOLUTIONSone grant, 2020 · $1.0M
- PFPathcheck Foundationone grant, 2022 · $244k · revenue -96% · 55% of their budget
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.
Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…
Health Access Fund works to protect the fundamental right of all people to choose and access quality,dignified and affordable reproductive health care.
The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
Power to decide envisions a world where everyone - no matter who they are or where they live - has control over their bodies and can decide if, when, and under what circumstances to get pregnant and have a child. its mission is to advance…
Aahi is a nonprofit biotech research institute, bringing together the best experts, technologies, and platforms to create accessible, high-quality products and solutions for harnessing the immune system to alleviate disease.
Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.
(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.
Altarum is focused on improving the health of individuals with fewer financial resources and populations disenfranchised by the health care system. we drive impactful changes in four domains: 1) transform health service delivery - we work…
National institute for reproductive health, inc. works to protect and advance equitable access to reproductive health care by building power at the state and local level. using an approach that is rooted in partnerships with state and…
The national institute for reproductive health action fund conducts non-partisan issue advocacy and electoral engagement to advance reproductive health, rights, and justice in states and cities across the country. nirh action fund builds…
To conduct and support programs and activities aimed at solving some of the world's greatest public health challenges, with a specific focus on enabling health workers to have the greatest possible impact on the health of the people they…
Healthq is committed to providing sexual and reproductive healthcare without judgment or barriers.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fund Texas Choice and the most unlike its peers is Health Access Connect Inc. 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 32 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
36 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. 36 of the 60 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 ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI ↗
- Who funds GRAHAM WINDHAM ↗
- Who funds POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds THE ONE LOVE FOUNDATION IN HONOR OF YEARDLEY LOVE INC ↗
- Who funds Integrate Health Inc ↗
- Who funds ROUNDUP RIVER RANCH ↗
- Who funds ACUMEN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Pathcheck Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE HARMONY PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds HEALTH ACCESS CONNECT USA INC ↗
- Who funds THE DOOR - A CENTER OF ALTERNATIVES INC ↗
- Who funds HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE SOCIETY OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds DENVER HEALTH AND HOSPITALS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HEALTH ACCESS CONNECT INC ↗
- Who funds VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds JBFC INC DBA MAINSPRINGSJBFC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds THE GILDER LEHRMAN INSTITUTE OF AMERICAN HISTORY ↗
- Who funds THE PHILANTHROPY WORKSHOP INC DBA FORWARD GLOBAL ↗
- Who funds CRISIS TEXT LINE INC ↗
- Who funds ALEXANDER TWILIGHT ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds Betty Ford Alpine Gardens ↗
- Who funds Wheaton College ↗
- Who funds Humane World for Animals Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF FONDATION DE FRANCE INC ↗
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: Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Network of Abortion Funds Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · McKesson Foundation Inc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc
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 Marshmere 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 Marshmere Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Marshmere 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.