· Private foundation
Fred Siegel Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
Read this first · the figures below need context
100% of Fred Siegel Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2020, the last year Fred Siegel Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 13 organizations, $142k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k23 grants · $61k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $81k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN JEWISH DISTRIBUTION C | $25,000 |
| UNITED JEWISH COMMUNITIES | $16,000 |
| SHARE OUR SELVES | $10,000 |
| LANA BERKE SILVERMAN SCHOLR FD | $10,000 |
| MAZON | $10,000 |
| CLEVELAND CLINIC | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| MAKE A WISH | $5,000 |
| MARCH FIELD MUSEUM | $5,000 |
| UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MUSEUM | $4,000 |
| AIDS SERVICES FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| WORLD JEWISH CONGRESS | $4,000 |
| AIDS PROJECT LOS ANGELES | $3,000 |
| AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICES | $3,000 |
| JEWISH FAMILY CHILDRENS SERVICES | $3,000 |
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 (FY17–20, $59k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 32% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 46% of Fred Siegel Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +63% since the first grant, against +43% for the ones you funded once.
32 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2020, 4 since wound down. Read against FY2020, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2020, 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
- MAMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger4× · 2017–2020 · $50k · revenue +50%
Share Our Selves Corporation4× · 2017–2020 · $40k · revenue +63%- TUThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum4× · 2017–2020 · $16k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- C1CHP 11-99 FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +43%
- TLTHE LEUKEMIA LYMPHOMA SOCIETYone grant, 2017 · $1k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $1k
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.
Mission statement: mission: caring for our patients first and our people always. vision: to be the most comprehensive, integrated and connected health system for getting and staying well. values: excellence - we deliver high-quality,…
Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.
Mission: Inspired by their history and values, Jewish Family Service supports the needs of Jewish individuals and families, refugees and immigrants, and the broader community to achieve well-being, health, and stability. From food security…
Jfsla's mission is to provide life-improving services that help the people of los angeles live with dignity and exercise self-determination. we believe in and strive for a more compassionate los angeles where no one has to navigate life…
To provide high-quality, affordable health care services to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve.
MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…
Promotion and advancement of children's health through patient care, research, and education.
The rescue mission alliance's primary purpose is to establish and operate rescue missions to reach the less fortunate with the gospel of jesus christ and to assist in the feeding, clothing, and lodging of those who are destitute or…
To eliminate disparities in health care access and outcomes by providing superior quality health and human services through an integrated world-class delivery system for latino, multi-ethnic underserved communities in southern california.
The ama foundation brings together physicians and communities to improve our nation's health.
To improve the health and well-being of individuals, families and our communities, by benefiting, performing the functions of and carrying out the purposes of the nonprofit, tax-exempt hospitals and other healthcare providers of which the…
The organization's mission is to mobilize resources to fight hunger in our community. to fulfill its mission, the food bank:* sources and acquires nutritious food and other products and distribute them to people experiencing nutrition…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Los Angeles Mission Inc and the most unlike its peers is Red Bucket Equine Rescue. 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 — 5% 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.
19 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. 19 of the 40 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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger ↗
- Who funds Share Our Selves Corporation ↗
- Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
- Who funds Jewish Family Services Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds AIDS PROJECT LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds PARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT ANGEL FOOD ↗
- Who funds RED BUCKET EQUINE RESCUE ↗
- Who funds BEYOND BLINDNESS ↗
- Who funds Orange County Rescue Mission Inc ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds ORANGEWOOD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Maternal and Child Health Access ↗
- Who funds COAST GUARD FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHP 11-99 FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MANZANO DAY SCHOOL ↗
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: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Fred Siegel 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 Fred Siegel Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Fred Siegel 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.