· Private foundation
Brooks-Mathews Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k3 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $68k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $120k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Natl Sailing Hall of Fame Museum | $70,000 |
| Asian Art Museum Fdn of SF | $50,000 |
| National Maritime Historical Societ | $25,000 |
| UCSF Foundation | $25,000 |
| Int'l Yacht Restoration School | $17,500 |
| STFYC International Yacht Racing Fd | $8,000 |
| Newport Historical Society | $7,500 |
| St Francis Sailing Foundation | $500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 46% of your 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 +46% since the first grant, against -26% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 1 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k 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
- ISIYRS SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY & TRADES INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +15%
- NYNEW YORK YACHT CLUB FOUNDATION6× · 2017–2022 · $537k · revenue +132%
- TUTHE USMMA SAILING FOUNDATION INC2× · 2019–2020 · $110k · revenue +132%
Funded once
- SISTFYC International Yacht Racingone grant, 2017 · $145k
- BMBella Mente Quantum Racing Associatone grant, 2022 · $100k
- TSTHE SAILING FOUNDATION OF NEW YORK INCone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -56%
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.
Promote national and international amateur sailing, maritime education and competition. the foundation supports these activities through outreach programs, training activities, provision of sailing equipment and facilities and…
The organization is an exempt social club under irc section 501(c)(7), whose program service activities are organized and operated substantially for the pleasure & recreation of its members. all programs of the club are related to the…
Promotion of amateur sailing
Sailing school
Mission Statement To promote, develop, and maintain sailing education activities; Continued on attached statement
To promote and provide public access to sailing. To promote National and International competition.
The organization preserves the history of sailing and its impact on american culture; honors those who have made outstanding contributions to the sport; demonstrates its value for scholastic and life skills learning; and encourages sailing…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nantucket Community Sailing Inc and the most unlike its peers is Lehrhaus Judaica dba Hamaqom the Place. 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 41 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 — 0.0% 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.
26 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. 26 of the 43 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 IYRS SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY & TRADES INC ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO ART INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK YACHT CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ASIAN ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO ↗
- Who funds THE USMMA SAILING FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MARITIME HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds OAKLAND MILITARY INSTITUTE COLLEGE PREPARATORY ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds ST FRANCIS SAILING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAIL NEWPORT ↗
- Who funds THE SAILING FOUNDATION OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SCRIPPS HEALTH ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND FOUNDATION & ALUMNI ENGAGEMENT ↗
- Who funds TOWN SCHOOL FOR BOYS ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC VISION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NEWPORT HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds SAN LEANDRO SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE STORM TRYSAIL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Classic Yacht Owners Association ↗
- Who funds NEWPORT BERMUDA RACE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Lehrhaus Judaica dba HAMAQOM The Place ↗
- Who funds SCHOONER MARTHA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EAST BAY INNOVATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds SAIL TO PREVAIL ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET COMMUNITY SAILING 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: Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Lyn & Margaret Comfort Charitable Foundation · Richard and Ann Du Moulin Foundation · Kane Wallace Foundation · Ernst & Elfriede Frank Foundation Inc · Hamilton Family Foundation · Winifred M Purdy Foundation · James M Schoonmaker II Foundation · Gubelmann Family Foundation Inc · Harbor Lights Foundation · The Seip Family Foundation Limited Eevercore Trust CO C/O Ashley Ferriello · Alletta Morris McBean Charitable Trust
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 Brooks-Mathews 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.
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 Brooks-Mathews Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Brooks-Mathews 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.