· Private foundation
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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 $10k909 grants · $2.0M
- $10k–50k716 grants · $19M
- $50k–250k798 grants · $104M
- $250k+670 grants · $498M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CENTER ON BUDGET AND POLICY PRIORITIES | $12,152,000 |
| COMMUNITY CATALYST | $8,620,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN POPULATION HEALTH INSTITUTE | $7,437,248 |
| VOSE RIVER CHARITABLE FUND | $5,817,555 |
| ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE | $5,220,000 |
| FAMILY VALUES WORK A MULTI STATE CONSORTIUM INC | $5,220,000 |
| BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY | $4,500,000 |
| PRINCETON UNIVERSITY | $4,242,404 |
| JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY | $4,094,899 |
| CENTER FOR BLACK HEALTH AND EQUITY | $4,000,000 |
| NEW VENTURE FUND | $3,550,416 |
| NEW YORK UNIVERSITY | $3,408,828 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $3,348,225 |
| CENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE | $3,262,500 |
| JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH | $3,188,657 |
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 (FY17–24, $50.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 88% 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 +32% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
1493 repeat relationships — 468 still active in FY2024, 1025 since wound down; 246 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, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $187M 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
- CCCOMMUNITY CATALYST INC8× · 2017–2024 · $91M · revenue +31% · 81% of their budget
THE URBAN INSTITUTE8× · 2017–2024 · $69M · revenue +51%- AHAmerican Heart Association Inc8× · 2017–2024 · $68M · revenue +33%
Funded once
- UIUNIDOS INVESTMENT FUND INCone grant, 2022 · $5.0M · revenue -25%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $5.0M
- MOMeals on Wheels Amone grant, 2020 · $4.0M
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.
See schedule ouniversity of new haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts & professional education.
Iphi develops multi-sector partnerships and innovative solutions to improve the public's health and well-being across maryland, virginia and the district of columbia. our work strengthens health systems and policy, enhances conditions that…
Highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on u.s. foreign policy
To improve patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice.
Inspired by jewish values, the national council of jewish women is a grassroots organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children, and families, and by safeguarding…
Deliver world-class resources and mentoring to enable every entrepreneur across the globe to realize their maximum potential.
To advance professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power.
The common application promotes access, equity, and integrity in the college admission process.
A higher educational institution, providing both undergraduate and graduate degrees.
Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…
The National Constitution Center is a nonpartisan nonprofit organization devoted to teaching about the Constitution.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Catalyst Inc and the most unlike its peers is English Language Institute in China. 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 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.8% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
870 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. 870 of the 2,000 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 COMMUNITY CATALYST INC ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds THE URBAN INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds Center on Budget and Policy Priorities ↗
- Who funds THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds ChangeLab Solutions ↗
- Who funds BOREALIS PHILANTHROPY ↗
- Who funds POLICYLINK ↗
- Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds ACADEMYHEALTH ↗
- Who funds TRUST FOR AMERICAS HEALTH ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE'S ACTION INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds The Pew Charitable Trusts ↗
- Who funds THE REINVESTMENT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL HEALTH LAW PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds LOW INCOME INVESTMENT FUND ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC ↗
- Who funds National 4-H Council ↗
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: Princeton Area Community Foundation Inc · Freedom Together Foundation · Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation Inc · Geraldine R Dodge Foundation Inc · Curtis W McGraw Foundation · The Burke Foundation Inc · George H and Estelle M Sands Foundation · Laura and John Arnold Foundation · The Commonwealth Fund · Pseg Foundation Inc · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · Citizens Philanthropic Foundation 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 Wood Johnson 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- National Institute for Children's Health Quality Inc — 100% of income from government
- New Brunswick Tomorrow — 74% of income from government
- Child Trends Inc — 50% of income from government
- Commonwealth Care Alliance Inc — 44% of income from government
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Community Catalyst Inc — 15% of income from government
- New Growth Innovation Network — 13% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- National Association of Community Health Centers Inc — 12% of income from government
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- The Housing Partnership Network Inc — 10% of income from government
- New Jersey Future Inc — 7% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc — 6% of income from government
- University of Miami — 5% of income from government
- Community Loan Fund of New Jersey Inc — 3% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% of income from government
- United Way of Northern New Jersey Inc — 3% of income from government
- The Watershed Institute Inc — 3% of income from government
- The Nemours Foundation — 0% of income from government
- The Center for Effective Philanthropy Inc — 0% of income from government
- Institute for Healthcare Improvement — 0% of income from government
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.