Skip to content
The Ronald and Jane Olson Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Ronald and Jane Olson Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$716k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$350k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$815kInternational$745kSocial Science$345kArts & Culture$185kCrime & Legal$177kPhilanthropy$46kHuman Services$38kReligion$35kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+2 grants · $700k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$5.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DRAKE UNIVERSITY$350,000
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION$350,000
NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL$10,000
FAINTING ROBIN FOUNDATION$4,000
LAS FAMILIAS DEL PUEBLO$2,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY22–22, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%LITTLE HAWKS CHILDCARE CENTER: $25k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

MI
NY
IA
CA
CO
NE
NC
DC
LA
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 9 repeat orgs$858k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
19

Total granted

$1.6M
$498k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+1%
+59%

Still filing today

78%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $360k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalEducationArts & CulturePhilanthropyPublic BenefitHuman ServicesOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • DRAKE UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2022–2025 · $415k · revenue +1%
  • The Rand Corporation
    2× · 2022–2023 · $340k · revenue +16%
  • LA
    Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
    2× · 2017–2018 · $175k · revenue +269%

Funded once

  • DIRECT RELIEFgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $125k · revenue +94%
  • TN
    THE NATIONAL WWII MUSEUM
    one grant, 2024 · $100k
  • TN
    THE NATIONAL WORLD WAR II MUSEUM INC
    one grant, 2019 · $60k · revenue -9%
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
National Opinion Research Center

See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…

Social Science
2
Npr Foundation

The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…

—
3
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
4
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
5
Golden Gate University

Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…

Education
6
University of Virginia Investment Management Company

The university of virginia investment management company (uvimco) is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations (uaos).

Education
7
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
8
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
9
Ucla Foundation

The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…

Education
10
California Dental Association

The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

Community Improvement
11
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
12
The Uc Davis Foundation

The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Human Rights Watch Inc; the most unlike its peers is The National World War Ii Museum Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

20 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 31 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DRAKE UNIVERSITY: $415,000 · EducationDRAKE UNIVERSITYUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $350,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION+1 more: $25,000 · EducationHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $600,000 · InternationalHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INCDIRECT RELIEF: $125,000 · InternationalDIRECT RELIEF+1 more: $20,000 · InternationalThe Rand Corporation: $340,000 · Public BenefitThe Rand Corpor…THE NATIONAL WWII MUSEUM: $100,000 · OtherTHE NATIONAL …ALL SAINTS CHURCH: $35,000 · OtherALL SAINTS CH…OXFORD UNIVERSITY COLLEGE: $25,000 · OtherOXFORD UNIVER…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $20,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CO…SOUTHERN CA PUBLIC RADIO: $15,000 · OtherNC BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $12,000 · OtherFAINTING ROBIN FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherUniversity of Michigan: $10,000 · OtherNATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $10,000 · OtherLITTLE HAWKS CHILDCARE CENTER INC: $25,000 · OtherLITTLE HAWKS …+9 more: $24,431 · Other+9 moreLegal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles: $175,000 · Crime & LegalTHE NATIONAL WORLD WAR II MUSEUM INC: $60,000 · Arts & CultureWESTERN IOWA JOURNALISM FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Arts & CultureMUNGER TOLLES & OLSON FOUNDATION: $24,000 · PhilanthropySKID ROW HOUSING TRUST: $2,000 · Philanthropy
Education$790,000International$745,000Public Benefit$340,000Other$286,431Crime & Legal$175,000Arts & Culture$70,000Philanthropy$26,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $600,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetDRAKE UNIVERSITY: $415,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $350,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Rand Corporation: $340,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLegal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles: $175,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $125,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATIONAL WORLD WAR II MUSEUM INC: $60,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe George Washington University: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLITTLE HAWKS CHILDCARE CENTER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetMUNGER TOLLES & OLSON FOUNDATION: $24,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPACIFIC COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL POLICY: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetWESTERN IOWA JOURNALISM FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetUniversity of Michigan: $10,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetLas Familias Del Pueblo: $7,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetSALZBURG GLOBAL SEMINAR INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSKID ROW HOUSING TRUST: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUSAGAINSTALZHEIMER'S: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJUSTICE IN AGING: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSequoia Riverlands Trust: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

California Community …The Ralph M Parsons F…American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
California Community FoundationCA14.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Ronald and Jane Olson Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Ronald and Jane Olson Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 31 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ronald and Jane Olson’s filings →

    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 endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home