· Private foundation
Chatterjee Charitable 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.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k2 grants · $60k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| THE ASIA SOCIETY | $50,000 |
| COOPER HEWITT NATIONAL DESIGN MUSEUM SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION | $45,000 |
| COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS | $15,000 |
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 (FY23–24, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% 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 +34% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION6× · 2017–2022 · $686k · revenue +34%- TCTCG CENTRES FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INC5× · 2020–2024 · $585k · revenue +180% · 100% of their budget
- COCOUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC6× · 2017–2025 · $60k · revenue +18%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA REGENTSone grant, 2017 · $90k
- SFSAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC PRESSone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -33%
- CICAPITAL IIT ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INCone grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue 0%
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 institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
The Institute for New Global Politics is a California-based educational nonprofit corporation organized and operated exclusively for charitable purposes. It is an independent and nonpartisan thinktank dedicated to educating the general…
The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."
Description of organization mission: the paley center for media is the premier institution dedicated to advancing the understanding of media-it's artistic value, social impact and historical importance-for the public and media…
Creating a more sustainable, peaceful, and just world through education, development, and exchange since 1932. as both an accredited academic institution and an international ngo, world learning, inc. offers the best of theory and practice…
Committed to innovation, the solomon r. guggenheim foundation (the "foundation") collects, (continued on schedule o)
Poptech's mission is to accelerate the positive impact of world-changing people, projects and ideas. founded in 1996 by bob metcalfe (inventor, ethernet) and john sculley (apple, pepsi), poptech originally provided a forum to critically…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alvin Ailey Dance Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Tcg Centres for Research and Education in Science and Technology Inc. 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 29 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
21 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. 21 of the 37 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 SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION ↗
- Who funds TCG CENTRES FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATION IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INC ↗
- Who funds THE ASIA SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO PUBLIC PRESS ↗
- Who funds CAPITAL IIT ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds WHEELS GLOBAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Mission Local SF Inc ↗
- Who funds IITKGP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RUBIN MUSEUM OF ART AKA THE SHELLEY & DONALD RUBIN CULTURAL TRUST ↗
- Who funds LONGHOUSE RESERVE ↗
- Who funds INDO AMERICAN ARTS COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE INC ↗
- Who funds ART OF LIVING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE GRADUATE CENTER FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN BUREAU OF COMMUNITY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds WOMENSAFE INC ↗
- Who funds ALVIN AILEY DANCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ART21 INC ↗
- Who funds GIVE2ASIA ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK PUBLIC RADIO ↗
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: American Express Foundation · The Yelp Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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 Chatterjee Charitable 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 Chatterjee Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Chatterjee Charitable 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.