· Private foundation
Arthur H Cort Family 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST | $6,304 |
| ASSOCIATION FOR CREATINE DEFICIENCE | $5,110 |
| EASTERSEALS | $5,040 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB | $3,018 |
| COURAGEOUS SAILING | $1,000 |
| PAN MASS CHALLENGE | $763 |
| BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS | $527 |
| TEAM NEW ENGLAND YOUTH | $515 |
| BAND OF PARENTS | $500 |
| FEED THE CHILDREN | $500 |
| ACTBLUE CHARITIES | $500 |
| DRAVET SYNDROME FOUNDATION | $350 |
| 100 CLUB MASSACHUSETTS | $258 |
| BOSTON CHILDRENS HOSPITAL | $150 |
| HAYMAKERS FOR HOPE | $100 |
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 (FY19–23, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 63% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 +2% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 9 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, 34% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k 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
- CSCOURAGEOUS SAILING CENTER FOR YOUTH INC3× · 2022–2025 · $5k · revenue +35%
- GBGREATER BOSTON FOOD BANK INC4× · 2020–2023 · $4k · revenue +1%
PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC7× · 2017–2025 · $2k · revenue +49%
Funded once
- FDFIDELITY DONOR ADVISED FUNDone grant, 2021 · $44k
- BBBIG BROTHER BIG SISTERSone grant, 2018 · $8k
- MOMARCH OF DIMESone grant, 2024 · $5k
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.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Mass general brigham health plan's mission is to promote the health and wellness of our members, and to help ensure equitable, affordbale health care for the diverse communities we serve.
Bridgespan's mission is to build a better world by strengthening the ability of mission-driven organizations and philanthropists to achieve breakthrough results in addressing society's most important challenges and opportunities.
The mission of Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network (DFCCN) is to promote and support, directly or indirectly, the interests and purposes of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI).
As Greater Boston's community foundation, the Boston Foundation devotes its resources to expanding opportunities, improving lives and strengthening communities. See Schedule OThe Foundation fulfills this mission in three principal ways:…
The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…
Commonwealth care alliance, inc.'s mission is to improve the health and well-being of people with significant needs by innovating, coordinating and providing the highest quality, individualized care.
Coordination of oncology clinical research, education and programs across dana-farber, massachusetts general hospital, and brigham and women's hospital.
The mission of the university of massachusetts foundation, inc. is to foster and promote the growth, progress and general welfare of the university of massachusetts as stated in the original 1950 articles of organization. the foundation…
Wentworth institute of technology is a nationally recognized private coeducational and residential university of higher education with a mission to empower, inspire and innovate through experiential learning with a core purpose of career…
Massachusetts taxpayers foundation provides public & private sector decision makers with accurate, timely, unbiased research & constructive solutions that drive public policy in order to strengthen the state's finances & position the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Lenny Zakim Fund and the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc. 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 30 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
45 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. 45 of the 83 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 Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds KING SOLOMON HUMANITARIAN FOUNDATION FOR HANDICAPPED CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST ↗
- Who funds Association for Creatine Deficiencies ↗
- Who funds COURAGEOUS SAILING CENTER FOR YOUTH INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER BOSTON FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds BIG SISTER ASSOCIATION OF GREATER BOSTON INC ↗
- Who funds PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC ↗
- Who funds PINE STREET INN INC ↗
- Who funds EASTER SEALS MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE WEBB INNOVATION CENTER FOR DYSLEXIA ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds CAMP BAUERCREST INC ↗
- Who funds FEED THE CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds NETWORK FOR GOOD ↗
- Who funds JENNIFERS GIFT OF HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds WESTON METCO SCHOLARSHIP FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE LENNY ZAKIM FUND ↗
- Who funds THE SUMAIRA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds VALUE SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds ACTBLUE CHARITIES 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: Boston Foundation Inc · Arbella Insurance Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · American Tower Corporation Foundation Inc · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Cummings Foundation Grants Inc (Fka Oneworld Boston Inc) · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Verizon Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund
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 Arthur H Cort Family 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Easter Seals Massachusetts Inc — 45% of income from government
- Bridge Over Troubled Waters Inc — 32% of income from government
- Waltham Boys & Girls Club Inc — 29% of income from government
- Greater Boston Food Bank Inc — 22% of income from government
- Pine Street Inn Inc — 11% of income from government
- Courageous Sailing Center for Youth Inc — 10% of income from government
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Special Olympics Massachusetts Inc — 1% of income from government
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- The Baseball Inc — 1% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Arthur H Cort Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Arthur H Cort Family Foundation 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.