· Public charity
Trustees of Tufts College
Education and Research
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 149 grants below total $38,276,088 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $247,147,340 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $208,871,252 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $43k
- $10k–50k49 grants · $1.4M
- $50k–250k61 grants · $7.4M
- $250k+34 grants · $29M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Tufts Medical Center | $10,062,485 |
| Mass General Hospital | $2,542,813 |
| University of Massachusetts | $1,376,545 |
| Mass Institute of Technology | $1,134,073 |
| Brigham & Women's Hospital | $1,090,427 |
| Northeastern University | $1,057,726 |
| Texas A&M AGRILIFE Research | $707,531 |
| Catholic Relief Services | $683,998 |
| University of Washington | $675,316 |
| Cleveland Clinic Foundation | $632,231 |
| Washington University | $624,601 |
| University of California Davis | $575,453 |
| State of Wisconsin | $565,711 |
| Tetra Tech ARD | $517,650 |
| Kaiser Foundation Research Institute | $516,929 |
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 (FY17–25, $515k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +34% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
250 repeat relationships — 117 still active in FY2025, 133 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.2M 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
NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY9× · 2017–2025 · $4.6M · revenue +110%
JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC5× · 2021–2025 · $3.5M · revenue +99%
THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION7× · 2018–2025 · $3.3M · revenue +55%
Funded once
- NLNATIONAL LEAD FOR AMERICA INCone grant, 2022 · $1.0M · revenue +2%
- SCSOUTH CAROLINA NETWORKone grant, 2024 · $455k
- T1THE 100 MILE CLUB INCone grant, 2017 · $323k · revenue -22% · 30% of their budget
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.
Education and Research
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…
We educate the next generation of leaders to improve the health of our society.
Wpi transforms lives, turns knowledge into action to confront global challenges, and revolutionizes stem through distinctive and inclusive education, projects and research. (http://www.wpi.edu/about/mission.html)
Drexel university fulfills its founder's vision of preparing each new generation of students for productive professional and civic lives while also focusing its collective expertise on solving society's greatest problems. drexel is an…
Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
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.
Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…
Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Kentucky Research Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Deep Springs International. 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 51 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
213 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. 213 of the 352 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 Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds JSI RESEARCH & TRAINING INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds MaineHealth ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds BROWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Rush University Medical Center ↗
- Who funds Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds The Rand Corporation ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FOOD POLICY RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Corporation ↗
- Who funds BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Dartmouth College ↗
- Who funds THE MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL LEAD FOR AMERICA INC ↗
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: Trustees of Boston University · Johns Hopkins University · The Trustees of Columbia University in the City of New York · Vanderbilt University Medical Center · The George Washington University · Brown University · Yale University · University of Pittsburgh · Gates Foundation · President and Fellows of Harvard College · Northeastern University · Cornell 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 organization 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.
- Jsi Research & Training Institute Inc — 69% of income from government
- Child Trends Inc — 50% of income from government
- Terc Inc — 44% of income from government
- Ada Forsyth Institute Inc — 38% of income from government
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Boston Medical Center Corporation — 23% of income from government
- The Broad Institute Inc — 19% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 12% of income from government
- Community Servings Inc — 12% of income from government
- Yale University — 12% of income from government
- Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc — 11% of income from government
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% of income from government
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% of income from government
- Baystate Medical Center Inc — 9% of income from government
- Brandeis University — 9% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Northeastern University — 7% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center Inc — 6% of income from government
- University of Miami — 5% of income from government
- The Urban Farming Institute of Bostoninc — 4% of income from government
- University of Maryland Baltimore Foundation Inc — 3% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 3% of income from government
- The Trustees of the Smith College — 1% of income from government
- Wellesley College — 1% of income from government
- Lahey Clinic Inc — 1% of income from government
- Oregon Health & Science University Foundation — 1% of income from government
- Museum of Science — 0% of income from government
- Asian Women for Health Inc — 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.