Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

The National Federation of the Blind

Integrating the blind into society

$675k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$400k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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 FY2020–2025.

Health$3.2MArts & Culture$91kScience & Tech$47kEducation$35kReligion$9k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 6 grants below total $466,441 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $674,665 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $208,224 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $54k
  • $250k+1 grant · $400k
$18,479
Median grant
6
States reached
$43M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND$400,000
NFB OF AZ$25,000
NFB OF OR$18,479
NFB OF ID$10,079
NFB OF WA$7,883
NFB OF IN$5,000
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 (FY20–25, $2.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND: $400k → 19%JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND: $400k → 19%JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND: $350k → 19%JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND: $350k → 19%JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND: $300k → 19%JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND: $300k → 19%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
WA
ID
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
IN
PA
CT
CA
UT
CO
MD
AZ
OK
GA
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.

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.
$2.6M · 7 repeat orgs$455k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +31% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

7 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
25

Total granted

$2.6M
$450k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
0%

Still filing today

71%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHealthCivil RightsEducationHuman ServicesScience & 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

  • TJ
    THE JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND
    6× · 2020–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +31% · 41% of their budget
  • US
    UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2020–2023 · $214k
  • DB
    DAN'S BLIND AMBITION LLC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $130k

Funded once

  • EL
    EASY LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $89k
  • ST
    Sea to See
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue -41% · 31% of their budget
  • LO
    LOWELL OBSERVATORY
    one grant, 2022 · $47k · revenue -40%

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
American Museum of Natural History

The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."

Arts & Culture
2
National Federation of the Blind of New Mexico

Self-help for the blind

—
3
National Federation of the Blind of Missouri

Self help for the blind.

Health
4
National Federation of the Blind of Massachusetts Inc

self-help for the blind

—
5
National Federation of the Blind of Connecticut

Self-help for the blind

—
6
National Federation of the Blind of Hawaii

Self-help for the blind.

—
7
National Federation of the Blind of Alabama

self-help for the blind

Human Services
8
National Federation of the Blind of New Jersey

self-help for the blind

Civil Rights
9
National Federation of the Blind of Michigan

self-help for the blind

—
10
National Federation of the Blind of North Carolina

Self help for the blind.

—
11
National Federation of the Blind of Louisiana Inc

Self-help for the blind

—
12
National Federation of the Blind of Illinois

Self-help for the blind

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Federation of the Blind of Idaho and the most unlike its peers is Geneva Lake Astrophysics and Steam Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 45 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%8%<5yr16%12%5–10yr19%8%10–20yr16%8%20–35yr11%36%35–55yr16%28%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%1%<5yr16%3%5–10yr19%10%10–20yr16%1%20–35yr11%75%35–55yr16%10%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%1/34
the rest of the field
14%
5,903/41,815

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.

04the grantee network

23 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. 23 of the 34 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
11/23
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND — $2,100,000 · Human ServicesTHE JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUNDUTAH STATE UNIVERSITY — $213,660 · OtherUTAH STATE UNIVERSITYDAN'S BLIND AMBITION LLC — $130,000 · OtherDAN'S BLIND AMBITION …EASY LLC — $88,608 · OtherEASY LLCNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF OREGON — $64,127 · OtherNATIONAL FEDERATION O…MVERSE INC — $25,000 · Other+10 more — $113,499 · Other+10 moreIMPACTASSETSINC — $300,000 · PhilanthropyIMPACTASS…Sea to See — $50,000 · Arts & CultureTHE DISCOVERY MUSEUM INC — $26,016 · Arts & CultureCALIFORNIA STATE RAILROAD MUSEUM FOUNDATION INC — $16,077 · Arts & CultureSACRAMENTO HISTORY ALLIANCE INC — $9,450 · Arts & CultureALBANY INSTITUTE OF HISTORY AND ART — $9,260 · Arts & CultureHouston Museum of Natural Science — $9,240 · Arts & CultureSCIENCE MUSEUM OF MINNESOTA — $8,139 · Arts & CultureSCIENCE CENTRAL INC — $7,950 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF ARIZONA INC — $55,000 · HealthNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF WASHINGTON — $40,814 · HealthNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF INDIANA — $5,000 · HealthNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF TEXAS INC — $5,000 · HealthLOWELL OBSERVATORY — $46,761 · Science & TechNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF IDAHO — $41,502 · Civil RightsSCIACCESS INC — $5,000 · Civil RightsGENEVA LAKE ASTROPHYSICS AND STEAM INC — $25,000 · EducationSPRINGFIELD MUSEUMS CORPORATION — $5,000 · Education
Human Services$2,100,000Other$634,894Philanthropy$300,000Arts & Culture$136,132Health$105,814Science & Tech$46,761Civil Rights$46,502Education$30,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE JACOBUS TENBROEK MEMORIAL FUND — $2,100,000 over 6y, 41% of budgetIMPACTASSETSINC — $300,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF OREGON — $64,127 over 4y, 15% of budgetNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF ARIZONA INC — $55,000 over 2y, 48% of budgetSea to See — $50,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetLOWELL OBSERVATORY — $46,761 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF IDAHO — $41,502 over 5y, 22% of budgetNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF WASHINGTON — $40,814 over 5y, 12% of budgetTHE DISCOVERY MUSEUM INC — $26,016 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetGENEVA LAKE ASTROPHYSICS AND STEAM INC — $25,000 over 1y, 6.7% of budgetCALIFORNIA STATE RAILROAD MUSEUM FOUNDATION INC — $16,077 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSACRAMENTO HISTORY ALLIANCE INC — $9,450 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMUSEUM OF THE BIBLE — $9,450 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALBANY INSTITUTE OF HISTORY AND ART — $9,260 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHouston Museum of Natural Science — $9,240 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL COWBOY AND WESTERN HERITAGE MUSEUM — $8,750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSCIENCE MUSEUM OF MINNESOTA — $8,139 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSCIENCE CENTRAL INC — $7,950 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF CALIFORNIA INC — $7,300 over 1y, 13% of budgetNATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND OF TEXAS INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSPRINGFIELD MUSEUMS CORPORATION — $5,000 over 1y, 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.

Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY6.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 National Federation of the Blind 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 · 40%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • The Discovery Museum Inc — 15% of income from government
  • Springfield Museums Corporation — 5% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get 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 · 0–40%
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.

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 34 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. 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