Skip to content
E Schwartz Charitable Foundation Xxxxx7006 at a glance

· Private foundation

E Schwartz Charitable Foundation Xxxxx7006

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.

$2.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$400k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Education$5.0MHealth$3.6MScience & Tech$2.6MEmployment$1.6MHousing & Shelter$1.3MArts & Culture$475kFood & Nutrition$450kCommunity Improvement$200k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k9 grants · $925k
  • $250k+4 grants · $1.1M
$100,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$37M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY$400,000
THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY$250,000
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY$250,000
THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH$250,000
CENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATIO$150,000
MASSACHUSETTS HOUSING INVESTMENT$125,000
PARAPROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE INSTIT$100,000
PER SCHOLAS INC$100,000
NONTRADITIONAL EMPLOYMENT FOR WOMEN$100,000
NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION FOR SHELTER$100,000
MARCY LAB INC$100,000
ACE PROGRAMS FOR THE HOMELESS$75,000
CROSSROADS COMMUNITY SERVICES INC$75,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%MASSACHUSETTS HOUSING INVESTMENT: $125k → 12%MASSACHUSETTS HOUSING INVESTMENT CORP: $200k → 16%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $150k → 6%COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY: $200k → 7%ACE PROGRAMS FOR THE HOMELESS: $100k → 13%ALZHEIMERS ASSOCIATION: $120k → 14%JOHNS HOPKINS MEDICINE: $200k → 19%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $150k → 6%COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY: $150k → 7%JOHNS HOPKINS MEDICINE: $200k → 19%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $150k → 6%JOHNS HOPKINS MEDICINE: $200k → 19%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $150k → 6%JOHNS HOPKINS MEDICINE: $200k → 19%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $150k → 6%JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $400k → 19%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $150k → 6%JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $200k → 19%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%LUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $150k → 6%JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $200k → 19%THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $250k → 8%JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $200k → 19%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%THE JOHN SIMON GUGGENHEIM: $250k → 17%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%THE JOHN SIMON GUGGENHEIM: $150k → 17%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY: $250k → 8%THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $500k → 17%THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $250k → 17%THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $250k → 17%THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $250k → 17%THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $200k → 17%THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $200k → 17%THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $200k → 17%CENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATIO: $150k → 17%CENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATIO: $150k → 17%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$13M · 19 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
0

Total granted

$13M
$0

Still filing today

68%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationEmploymentCommunity ImprovementHousing & ShelterScience & TechHealthOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2022–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +26%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATION
    8× · 2018–2025 · $900k · revenue +32%
  • PS
    PER SCHOLAS INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $800k · revenue +256%

Funded once

    How this is measured

    Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

    04Its field

    Closest unfunded matches

    The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

    1
    University of New Haven

    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…

    Education
    2
    Northeast College of Health Sciences

    Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.

    Education
    3
    President and Fellows of Harvard College

    Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

    Education
    4
    Boston Architectural College

    The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

    —
    5
    Massachusetts Higher Education Assistance Corporation

    The organization's primary exempt purpose is to provide access to and conduct activities in furtherance of higher education.

    —
    6
    Mcphs University

    Mcphs university prepares students for careers in health care through teaching, scholarship, research, professional service and community engagement.

    Education
    7
    Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

    Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

    Health
    8
    Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

    Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

    Health
    9
    Lehigh University

    The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

    Education
    10
    Harvard Club of Washington Dc

    To inform and enrich the intellectual lives of 20,000 alumni of harvard university in the washington, dc area and to assist harvard university with respect to applicants and undergraduates from the dc area.

    Education
    11
    Stony Brook Ophthalmology University Faculty Practice Corporation

    Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

    Health
    12
    Stony Brook Surgical Associates University Faculty Practice Corporation

    Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

    Health
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Neighborhood Coalition for Shelter Inc; the most unlike its peers is Nontraditional Employment for Women. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
    04the grantee network

    14 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

    Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

    How this is measured

    Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 14 of the 20 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

    Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    1
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    14/14
    Grantees still filing
    12/14
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    THE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCH: $2,000,000 · OtherTHE WHITEHEAD INSTITUTE RESEARCHLUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATIC: $1,050,000 · OtherLUSTGARTEN FOUNDATION FOR PANCREATICCENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATION: $900,000 · OtherCENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATIONJOHNS HOPKINS MEDICINE: $800,000 · OtherJOHNS HOPKINS MEDICINEPARAPROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE INSTIT: $650,000 · OtherPARAPROFESSIONAL HEALTHCARE INSTITTHE JOHN SIMON GUGGENHEIM: $475,000 · OtherTHE JOHN SIMON GUGGENHEIMCROSSROADS COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $450,000 · OtherCROSSROADS COMMUNITY SERVICES INCACE PROGRAMS FOR THE HOMELESS: $275,000 · OtherMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $2,000,000 · EducationMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyTHE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $1,850,000 · EducationTHE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITYJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $1,000,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYMARCY LAB INC: $200,000 · EducationPER SCHOLAS INC: $800,000 · EmploymentPER SCHOLA…NONTRADITIONAL EMPLOYMENT FOR WOMEN: $650,000 · EmploymentNONTRADITI…MASSACHUSETTS HOUSING INVESTMENT CORPORATION: $725,000 · Housing & ShelterNEIGHBORHOOD COALITION FOR SHELTER INC: $250,000 · Housing & ShelterCOLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY: $650,000 · Science & TechHILLTOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $200,000 · Community ImprovementASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY EMPLOYMENT: $150,000 · Community ImprovementALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $220,000 · Health
    Other$6,600,000Education$5,050,000Employment$1,450,000Housing & Shelter$975,000Science & Tech$650,000Community Improvement$350,000Health$220,000

    Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

    25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMassachusetts Institute of Technology: $2,000,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY: $1,850,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $1,000,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATION: $900,000 over 8y, 2.1% of budgetPER SCHOLAS INC: $800,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS HOUSING INVESTMENT CORPORATION: $725,000 over 6y, 1.8% of budgetCOLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY: $650,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNONTRADITIONAL EMPLOYMENT FOR WOMEN: $650,000 over 8y, 3.0% of budgetCROSSROADS COMMUNITY SERVICES INC: $450,000 over 8y, 14% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD COALITION FOR SHELTER INC: $250,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $220,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHILLTOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $200,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetMARCY LAB INC: $200,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY EMPLOYMENT: $150,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budget
    Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

    A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

    • Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
    • Who funds THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY ↗
    • Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
    • Who funds CENTER FOR HEARING AND COMMUNICATION ↗
    • Who funds PER SCHOLAS INC ↗
    • Who funds MASSACHUSETTS HOUSING INVESTMENT CORPORATION ↗
    • Who funds COLD SPRING HARBOR LABORATORY ↗
    • Who funds NONTRADITIONAL EMPLOYMENT FOR WOMEN ↗
    • Who funds CROSSROADS COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
    • Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD COALITION FOR SHELTER INC ↗
    • Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
    • Who funds HILLTOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
    • Who funds MARCY LAB INC ↗
    • Who funds ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY EMPLOYMENT ↗

    Co-funders

    Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

    The Hyde and Watson F…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
    The Hyde and Watson FoundationNJ13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: The Hyde and Watson Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

    How this is measured
    Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

    How much its grantees rely on government

    Each dot is one organization E Schwartz Charitable Foundation Xxxxx7006 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from E Schwartz Charitable Foundation Xxxxx7006. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 35%
    • Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 35% of income from government
    • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 20 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on E Schwartz Charitable Foundation Xxxxx7006’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home