· Private foundation
Working Theory 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k9 grants · $48k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $65k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $350k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BREAKTHROUGH T1D | $200,000 |
| COLORECTAL CANCER ALLIANCE INC | $50,000 |
| TOWN OF LANCASTER | $50,000 |
| STARTING POINT SERVICES FOR VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC AN | $50,000 |
| CONNIE RICE INSTITUTE FOR URBAN PEACE | $25,000 |
| HONOR FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY | $15,000 |
| COMMONWEAL | $10,000 |
| CAMC FOUNDATION INC | $7,500 |
| CHILDRENS HOSPITAL LOS ANGELES | $7,500 |
| THE FOUNDATION FOR POST-ACUTE AND LONG-TERM CARE M | $5,000 |
| HEALTH IN AGING FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| INTEGRAL YOGA INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNA INC | $5,000 |
| CAPITAL HOSPICE | $5,000 |
| AMERICAN ACADEMY OF HOSPICE & PALLIATIVE MEDICINE | $5,000 |
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 (FY25–25, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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 +35% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 14 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, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $415k 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
- TCTHE CONNIE RICE INSTITUTE FOR URBAN PEACE2× · 2022–2025 · $75k · revenue +194%
- CACHARLESTON AREA MEDICAL CENTER INC2× · 2022–2023 · $18k · revenue +35%
- CHChildren's Hospital Los Angeles2× · 2022–2025 · $18k · revenue +23%
Funded once
- WTWorking Theory Farmgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +66%
- TUTemple University Hospital Incgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +32%
- TGThe George Washington Universityone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +13%
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.
To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).
Mass general brigham incorporated is developing an integrated health care delivery system throughout the region that offers patients a continuum of coordinated, high-quality care.
Our mission is to heal, comfort and care for the people of our community by providing advanced and compassionate health care of superior quality and value, supported by education and research.
Support of subsidiary tax-exempt healthcare, education and research organizations (see schedule o)
For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…
Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o
The organization is an affiliate within thomas jefferson university/jefferson health; a comprehensive professional university and tax-exempt integrated healthcare delivery system ("system"), with a tripartite mission of education, research…
We extend god's care through the ministry of physical, mental and spiritual healing.
To improve the health of those we serve.
The mission of Rush is to improve the health of the individuals and diverse communities we serve through the integration of outstanding patient care, education, research and community partnerships.
Huntington Health stands for community. We stand for compassion. But more than anything, Huntington stands for health. Providing world-class health care is our specialty, and it's what we've been doing for the San Gabriel Valley since…
MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Charleston Area Medical Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Wine to Water. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 27 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% 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.
22 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. 22 of the 28 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
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 BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
- Who funds Working Theory Farm ↗
- Who funds THE CONNIE RICE INSTITUTE FOR URBAN PEACE ↗
- Who funds COLORECTAL CANCER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Temple University Hospital Inc ↗
- Who funds THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds The George Washington University ↗
- Who funds CHARLESTON AREA MEDICAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds THE HONOR FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COMMONWEAL ↗
- Who funds Friends of Bassett Inc ↗
- Who funds Accessible Yoga Association ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOMEN JUDGES ↗
- Who funds CAMC FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Wine to Water ↗
- Who funds HEALTH IN AGING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Iona Senior Services ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR POST-ACUTE AND LONG TERM CARE MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds Capital Hospice ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ACADEMY OF HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE MEDICINE ↗
- Who funds EATON VILLAGE PRESERVATION SOCIETY ↗
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: National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Working Theory 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Working Theory Farm — 19% of income from government
- Capital Hospice — 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.