Skip to content
Thomas J Vincent Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Thomas J Vincent Foundation Inc

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.

$2.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$2.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Education$11MScience & Tech$8.0MCommunity Improvement$1.0MHealth$600kPhilanthropy$334kHuman Services$33kInternational$20kArts & Culture$7kOther$0
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $55k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $110k
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.1M
$20,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$22M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HANALANI SCHOOLS$2,100,000
Individual grant recipient$60,000
Individual grant recipient$50,151
SOUTHERN ADVENTIST UNIVERSITY$25,000
SAVE THE CHILDREN FOUNDATION$20,000
SHAW FAMILY FOUNDATION$10,000
SHRINERS HOSPITAL$5,000
ST LABRE INDIAN SCHOOLS$5,000
ALLIANCE BERNSTEIN$2,336
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%MIT: $1.6M → 8%ST LABRE INDIAN SCHOOLS: $5k → 12%SALVATION ARMY: $500 → 9%SHAW FAMILY FOUNDATION: $300k → 13%SAVE THE CHILDREN FOUNDATION: $20k → 9%SOUTHERN ADVENTIST UNIVERSITY: $25k → 12%ALLIANCE BERNSTEIN: $2k → 14%FINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROV: $200k → 12%MIT: $1.6M → 8%ALOHA UNITED WAY: $5k → 9%SHAW FAMILY FOUNDATION: $10k → 13%ALLIANCE BERNSTEIN: $935 → 14%FINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROV: $200k → 12%MIT: $1.6M → 8%ALOHA UNITED WAY: $5k → 9%FINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROV: $200k → 12%MIT: $1.6M → 8%ALOHA UNITED WAY: $5k → 9%FINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROV: $200k → 12%MIT: $1.6M → 8%ALOHA UNITED WAY: $5k → 9%FINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROV: $200k → 12%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $500k → 8%ALOHA UNITED WAY: $5k → 9%STAR ADVERTISER'S GOOD NEIGHBOR FD: $700 → 9%STAR ADVERTISER'S GOOD NEIGHBOR FD: $700 → 9%STAR ADVERTISER'S GOOD NEIGHBOR FD: $700 → 9%STAR ADVERTISER'S GOOD NEIGHBOR FD: $700 → 9%STAR ADVERTISER'S GOOD NEIGHBOR FD: $700 → 9%SHRINERS HOSPITAL: $10k → 9%SHRINERS HOSPITAL: $5k → 9%OTHER CONTRIBTUIONS: $50k → 9%HANALANI SCHOOLS: $6.2M → 9%HANALANI SCHOOLS: $2.1M → 9%HANALANI SCHOOL: $102k → 9%HANALANI SCHOOL: $102k → 9%HANALANI SCHOOL: $102k → 9%HANALANI SCHOOL: $102k → 9%HANALANI SCHOOL: $102k → 9%MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY HI: $8k → 9%MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY HI: $8k → 9%MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY HI: $8k → 9%HAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $1.6M → 9%MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY HI: $8k → 9%YMCA OF HONLULU: $485k → 9%MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY HI: $8k → 9%YMCA OF HONLULU: $60k → 9%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.
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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$19M · 12 repeat orgs$1.7M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +49% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
1

Total granted

$19M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+19%

Still filing today

25%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23’24
EducationPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • HS
    HANALANI SCHOOLS
    7× · 2017–2024 · $8.8M · revenue +49% · 27% of their budget
  • M
    MIT
    5× · 2017–2021 · $8.0M
  • FO
    FINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROV
    5× · 2017–2021 · $1.0M

Funded once

  • HP
    HAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2023 · $1.6M · revenue +19%
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 18 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
4/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HANALANI SCHOOLS: $8,821,716 · EducationHANALANI SCHOOLSHAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $1,550,000 · EducationHAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITYMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $500,000 · EducationMIT: $8,000,000 · OtherMITFINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROV: $1,000,000 · OtherFINANCE OFFICE REDEMPT DENVER PROVIndividual grant recipient: $545,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+9 more: $178,422 · OtherSHAW FAMILY FOUNDATION INC: $310,000 · PhilanthropyALOHA UNITED WAY INC: $23,750 · PhilanthropySave The Children Federation Inc: $20,000 · International
Education$10,871,716Other$9,723,422Philanthropy$333,750International$20,000

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 budgetHANALANI SCHOOLS: $8,821,716 over 7y, 27% of budgetHAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY: $1,550,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $500,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHAW FAMILY FOUNDATION INC: $310,000 over 2y, 92% of budgetALOHA UNITED WAY INC: $23,750 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $20,000 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.

  • Who funds HANALANI SCHOOLS ↗
  • Who funds HAWAII PACIFIC UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
  • Who funds SHAW FAMILY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ALOHA UNITED WAY INC ↗
  • Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Thomas J Vincent Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Thomas J Vincent Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 35%
  • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 27% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report 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
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Thomas J Vincent Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Thomas J Vincent 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.

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 18 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Thomas J Vincent’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