Skip to content
Gerald Abell Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Gerald Abell Foundation Inc

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$37k
Granted FY2020
3
Grants FY2020
2
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

Public Benefit$50kInternational$32kEducation$31kReligion$14kAnimals$2kHousing & Shelter$2kHealth$1kHuman Services$900Other$0
02FY2020 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k2 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
$6,200
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS$30,000
SHAWNIGAN USA FUND$6,200
Individual grant recipient$300
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–19, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 15% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HUMOROLOGY INC: $500 → 10%CONNECTIONS FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN: $200 → 14%PATHWAYS VERMONT: $1k → 10%CONNECTIONS FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND CHILDREN: $200 → 14%PATHWAYS VERMONT: $500 → 10%PATHWAYS VERMONT: $250 → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
WA
IL
WI
NY
MA
CT
RI
CA
CO
AZ
TX
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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$100k · 10 repeat orgs$32k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +74% since the first grant, against +61% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2020, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
13

Total granted

$100k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+74%
+61%

Still filing today

70%
92%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
AnimalsInternationalHuman ServicesEnvironmentEducationPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • PP
    POLY PREP COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL
    2× · 2017–2019 · $20k · revenue +59%
  • CO
    COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $12k · revenue +18%
  • PV
    PATHWAYS VERMONT INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $2k · revenue +175%

Funded once

  • NC
    NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNITED STATES -CHINA RELATIONS INC
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue +8%
  • PC
    PETSMART CHARITIES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +43%
  • TE
    THE EXPLORERS CLUBgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $500 · revenue +223%
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
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
The Population Council Inc

We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…

International
3
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
4
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
5
American Museum of Natural History

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."

Arts & Culture
6
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
7
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
8
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
9
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
10
New York University

Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.

Education
11
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
12
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Petsmart Charities Inc; the most unlike its peers is Shawnigan Usa Fund. 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

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 26 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
20/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONS: $50,000 · OtherCOMMITTEE ON US-CHINA RELATIONSTAMID THE DOWNTOWN SYNAGOGUE: $13,940 · OtherTAMID THE DOWNTOWN SYNAGOGUE+9 more: $3,468 · OtherNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNITED STATES -CHINA RELATIONS INC: $20,000 · InternationalNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNIT…COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC: $12,180 · InternationalCOUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIO…+1 more: $150 · InternationalPOLY PREP COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL: $20,050 · EducationPOLY PREP COUNTRY DAY…SHAWNIGAN USA FUND: $6,200 · EducationSHAWNIGAN USA FUNDBROWN UNIVERSITY: $5,000 · Community ImprovementPATHWAYS VERMONT INC: $1,750 · Human ServicesHUMOROLOGY INC: $500 · Human ServicesCONNECTIONS FOR ABUSED WOMEN AND THEIR CHILDREN: $400 · Human ServicesPETSMART CHARITIES INC: $1,000 · AnimalsWINGS OF RESCUE INC: $500 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation Society: $400 · AnimalsTHE MAXFUND INC: $400 · AnimalsENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $500 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF DUANE PARK INC: $150 · Environment
Other$67,408International$32,330Education$26,250Community Improvement$5,000Human Services$2,650Animals$2,300Environment$650

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPOLY PREP COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL: $20,050 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL COMMITTEE ON UNITED STATES -CHINA RELATIONS INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC: $12,180 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBROWN UNIVERSITY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPATHWAYS VERMONT INC: $1,750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPETSMART CHARITIES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE EXPLORERS CLUB: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Houston Food Bank: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWINGS OF RESCUE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMOROLOGY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetALL HANDS AND HEARTS SMART RESPONSE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBOULDER SHELTER FOR THE HOMELESS INC: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MAXFUND INC: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCity Squash Inc: $118 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Jpmorgan Chase Founda…The Pfizer Foundation…Morgan Stanley Global…Gs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY12× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Gerald Abell Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gerald Abell Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 65%
  • Pathways Vermont Inc: 65% of income from government
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Gerald Abell Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Gerald Abell Foundation Inc 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.

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 26 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Gerald Abell’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