How much did Trustees of Tufts College grant in FY2023?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 64% of Trustees of Tufts College’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

03FY2023 · 152 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2023

Under $10k16 grants · $124k
$10k–50k52 grants · $1.4M
$50k–250k65 grants · $7.5M
$250k+19 grants · $19M

$57,558

Median grant

States reached

$4.6B

Total assets

Largest grants

Tufts Medical Center$9,586,729
Mass Institute of Technology$1,229,538
Tetra Tech ARD$1,044,640
JSI Research & Training Institute Inc$741,589
Mass General Hospital$712,997
Arizona State University$712,237
University of Washington$672,555
Mubulushu International Inc$630,917
University of Massachusetts$499,033
University of Pittsburgh$490,254
Duke University$395,364
Maine Medical Center$363,875
Virginia Polytechnic Inst & State University$359,393
State of Vermont$357,522
Northeastern University$335,818

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 (FY18–23, $367k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 10%. 36% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$143M · 204 repeat orgs$5.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +32% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.

204 repeat relationships — 122 still active in FY2023, 82 since wound down; 29 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

204

Total granted

$143M

$3.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%

+21%

Still filing today

60%

53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.8M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationHealthInternationalScience & TechHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther

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

Mass Institute of Technology
6× · 2018–2023 · $5.8M · revenue +12%
Northeastern University
6× · 2018–2023 · $2.8M · revenue +53%
The Cleveland Clinic Foundation
5× · 2018–2022 · $2.4M · revenue +62%

Funded once

LF
Lead for Americagraduated
one grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue +643%
YA
YouGov America Inc
one grant, 2021 · $267k
BR
Beckman Research Institute City of Hope
one grant, 2018 · $138k · revenue -51%

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.

Rosalind Franklin University of Medicine and Science

To improve the wellness of all people through innovative, interprofessional education of health and biomedical professionals and the discovery and implementation of knowledge.

—

Philadelphia University

To improve lives and provide students with exceptional value in 21st century professional education.

Education

The Rockefeller University

A world-renowned center for research and graduate education.

Education

University of Chicago

The mission of the university of chicago has been to sustain at the highest level of excellence, the communication of knowledge, the creation of knowledge and the fostering of a dynamic community of scholars and students.

Education

Massachusetts Institute of Technology Welfare Benefit Plans Trust

To provide health and life insurance benefits to covered eligible retirees of massachusetts institute of technology and their dependents, as well as individuals receiving long-term disability benefits for at least three years.

Membership Benefit

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

The howard hughes medical institute is a philanthropy that serves society through the direct conduct of biomedical research and support for programs in science education.

Health

New York Institute of Technology

We are committed to educating the next generation of leaders and inspiring innovation. (see sch o)

Education

Illinois Institute of Technology

To provide distinctive and relevant education in an environment of scientific, technological, and professional knowledge creation and innovation.

Education

New York Academy of Sciences

To advance scientific knowledge and to increase the number of scientifically informed individuals.

—

Long Island University

Provide excellence and access in education to those who seek to expand their knowledge. see sch o.

—

Harvard Medical Faculty Physicians At

As previously noted in this form 990, the mission of harvard medical faculty physicians at beth israel deaconess medical center, inc. is to provide extraordinary healthcare services, where the patient comes first, supported by world-class…

Health

Washington College

Washington college challenges and inspires emerging citizen leaders to discover lives of purpose and passion.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Kentucky Research Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners. 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.

05the grantee network

179 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

173/179

Grantees still filing

140/179

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$97,860,916Education$30,643,329Health$12,479,354Community Improvement$2,765,307Public Benefit$1,819,778Science & Tech$1,685,902Food & Nutrition$1,197,215

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.

Trustees of Boston UniversityMA46× affinity21 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Trustees of Boston University · Johns Hopkins University · The Trustees of Columbia University · Northwestern University · University of Pittsburgh · President and Fellows of Harvard College · Vanderbilt University Medical Center · Brown University · Boston Medical Center Corporation · Yale University · Northeastern University · The George Washington University

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 organisation Trustees of Tufts College 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

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

6get no government money at all

2rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Keyah Advanced Rural Manufacturing Alliance.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~19 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 4 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 9.5× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 851278591 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on Keyah Advanced Rural Manufacturing Alliance, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 19 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 61% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Trustees of Tufts College?

Find your warmest path to Trustees of Tufts College through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

Trustees of Tufts College

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

179 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Trustees of Tufts College?

More from the funding graph

Trustees of Tufts College

What you funded, over time

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

179 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Trustees of Tufts College?

More from the funding graph