Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Edward Payson George Charitable Trust

Its FY2017 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$1.1M
Granted FY2017
10
Grants FY2017
1
States reached
$420k
Largest
01What you fund
01FY2017 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k6 grants · $21k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $388k
  • $250k+2 grants · $675k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AIDS ACTION COMMITTEE OF MASSACHUSETTS$420,000
FENWAY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC$255,000
MATTAPAN COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER$218,864
EAST BOSTON NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CENTER$169,000
COMMUNITY MUSIC CENTER OF BOSTON$5,000
BEACON HILL VILLAGE$5,000
HALEY HOUSE INC$5,000
BEACON HILL SEMINARS$2,500
FRIENDS OF THE PUBLIC GARDEN$2,500
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE$500
02The need
02

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–17, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 16%BEACON HILL VILLAGE: $5k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your field

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.

1
Mass General Brigham Health Plan Inc

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.

Health
2
Harvard Street Neighborhood Health Center Inc

Harvard street neighborhood health center serves as the primary health resource to our community, through the delivery of comprehensive patient-centered medical care.

Health
3
North End Community Health Committee

To operate a community health center providing a full range of health care services including medical, dental, vision, mental health and elder services to residents of the north end, charlestown and west end of boston, massachusetts.

Health
4
Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program Inc

The mission of the boston health care for the homeless program (bhchp) is to provide or assure access to the highest quality health care for all individuals and families experiencing homelessness in our community.

Human Services
5
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
6
Massachusetts Council of Human Services Providers Inc

To advance the interests of the human services sector and providers through advocacy, education, and engagement of diverse stakeholders for collective impact.

7
Greater New Bedford Community Health Center Inc

To serve, educate, and inspire our patients in becoming more knowledgeable and participatory in their total health. to be a regional resource and leader focused on improving public health in the communities we serve.

8
Commonwealth Care Alliance Inc

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.

Health
9
Boston Medical Center Corporation

Boston medical center's mission is to provide consistently excellent and accessible health services to all in need of care regardless of status and ability to pay.

Health
10
The Boston Health Net Corporation

The boston healthnet operates to further the charitable and educational missions of its member institutions and health centers.

11
Central Maine Healthcare Corporation

To provide exceptional healthcare services in a safe and trustful environment through the expertise, committment, and compassion of our family of caregivers.

Health
12
Massachusetts Health & Hospital Assoc Inc

To advance the health of individuals and communities by serving as the leading voice for all massachusetts hospitals and healthcare systems and to help them provide high quality, cost-effective and equitable patient care.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fenway Community Health Center Inc 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.

03the grantee network

10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

AIDS ACTION COMMITTEE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC — $420,000 · OtherAIDS ACTION COMMITTEE OF MASSACHUSETTS INCMATTAPAN COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC — $218,864 · OtherMATTAPAN COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INCFENWAY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC — $255,000 · HealthFENWAY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INCNEIGHBORHEALTH CORPORATION — $169,000 · HealthNEIGHBORHEALTH CORPORATION+1 more — $500 · HealthHALEY HOUSE INC & AFFILIATES — $5,000 · Housing & ShelterCOMMUNITY MUSIC CENTER OF BOSTON INC — $5,000 · Arts & CultureBEACON HILL VILLAGE INC — $5,000 · Human ServicesFRIENDS OF THE PUBLIC GARDEN INC — $2,500 · EnvironmentBEACON HILL SEMINARS INC — $2,500 · Education
Other$638,864Health$424,500Housing & Shelter$5,000Arts & Culture$5,000Human Services$5,000Environment$2,500Education$2,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetAIDS ACTION COMMITTEE OF MASSACHUSETTS INC — $420,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetFENWAY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC — $255,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMATTAPAN COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER INC — $218,864 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetNEIGHBORHEALTH CORPORATION — $169,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHALEY HOUSE INC & AFFILIATES — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY MUSIC CENTER OF BOSTON INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBEACON HILL VILLAGE INC — $5,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetBEACON HILL SEMINARS INC — $2,500 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

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.

Boston Foundation IncMA13× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boston 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 Edward Payson George Charitable Trust 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 7%
  • Beacon Hill Village Inc28% of income from government
  • Fenway Community Health Center Inc27% of income from government
  • Mattapan Community Health Center Inc21% of income from government
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc7% of income from government
  • Neighborhealth Corporation4% of income from government
  • Friends of the Public Garden Inc1% of income from government
  • Community Music Center of Boston Inc1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 10 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph