A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 54% of THE ROBERT FLEMING & JANE HOWE PATRICK FOUNDATION INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k1 grant · $10k
$10k–50k1 grant · $25k
$50k–250k1 grant · $100k

$25,000

Median grant

States reached

$1.8M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
THE VERGENNES OPERA HOUSE	$100,000
COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTERS	$25,000
CHARLOTTE HISTORICAL SOCIETY	$9,548

02The need

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 (FY17–23, $60k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 80% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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.

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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$394k · 29 repeat orgs$324k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +68% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.

29 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 29 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$394k

$189k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+68%

+25%

Still filing today

62%

44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $135k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesArts & CultureFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterHealthRecreation & SportsOther

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

VF
VERMONT FOODBANK
5× · 2017–2023 · $79k · revenue +50%
RM
Rokeby Museum
3× · 2017–2023 · $38k · revenue +68%
UW
UNITED WAY OF ADDISON COUNTY INC
3× · 2020–2022 · $31k · revenue +10%

Funded once

UM
Union Meeting House
one grant, 2021 · $17k
PC
Pride Center of Vermont Inc
one grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue -28%
AS
Amidonian Society
one grant, 2021 · $10k

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.

Cooperation Vermont

The mission of cooperation vermont is to build thriving community economic and enviromental democracy.

Community Improvement

Groundworks Collaborative Inc

Groundworks collaborative, inc. provides emergency shelter, housing assistance & a food shelf for homeless persons.

—

Bennington County Meals Program

Provide quality, nutritious and creative meals to individuals age sixty years and older; as well as, disabled residents of Bennington County, Vermont. This is accomplished through a community meal program and home deliveries to those…

Food & Nutrition

Lamoille Community Food Share Inc

The mission of lamoille community food share is to help support and improve the physical well-being of individuals who might otherwise go hungry. to this end, we provide supplemental food free of charge in a supportive environment,…

Food & Nutrition

Cooperation Vermont Community Land Trust

The mission of cooperation vermont community land trust is to reclaim the commons.

Community Improvement

Community Harvest of Central Vermont

We bring our community together through gleaning to recover surplus food produced on area farms to feed those with limited access to nutritious, fresh local food, and in the process help the community to gain a greater awareness and…

Food & Nutrition

Feed Every Need

Feed Every Need is fighting hunger and food insecurity in Vermont by providing prepared meals to partner organizations for distribution to htose in need.

Food & Nutrition

The Homestead Inc

—

Vermont Council On Rural Development Inc

The Vermont Council on Rural Development helps Vermont citizens build prosperous and resilient communities through democratic engagement, marshalling resources, and collective action.

Community Improvement

Center for an Agricultural Economy Inc

The center for an agricultural economy supports rural communities and working landscapes by building a more interconnected local food system.

Environment

Vermont Fresh Network Corporation

Advancing relationships among farmers, chefs, and consumers to grow markets and eat more locally grown food.

Community Improvement

Valley Cares Inc

Create and provide a continuum of quality affordable housing and eldercare services for the residents of the west river valley and beyond, in cooperation with the community organizations and agencies that serve them.

Housing & Shelter

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vermont Folklife Center and the most unlike its peers is Potomac Theatre Project 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.

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 37 years old; the field is 21. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 16% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

2%1/53

the rest of the field

247/2,891

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

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

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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 50 of the 98 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

48/50

Grantees still filing

35/50

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$419,648Food & Nutrition$85,000Human Services$70,000Arts & Culture$57,000Philanthropy$31,000Health$29,000Housing & Shelter$25,500

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.

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.

The Vermont Community FoundationVT70.2× affinity36 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Vermont Community Foundation · Ben & Jerry's Foundation Inc · National Life Group Charitable Foundation Inc · The Windham Foundation Inc · Agnes M Lindsay Trust · Oakland Foundation Inc · Vermont Council on the Arts Inc · Richard E and Deborah L Tarrant Foundation Inc · Fanny Allen Corporation · United Way of Northwest Vermont Inc · George W Mergens Foundation · Community Bank Na Foundation of New England 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 Robert Fleming & Jane Howe Patrick Foundation Inc 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 moneyreceives it· size = income

15get no government money at all

12report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

10rely 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 Robert Fleming & Jane Howe Patrick Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Robert Fleming & Jane Howe Patrick Foundation Inc 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.

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