· Private foundation
Glass Charitable Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k8 grants · $95k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $607k
- $250k+1 grant · $300k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WYNDHAM LAND TRUST | $300,000 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM | $200,000 |
| THOMPSON ECUMENICAL EMPOWERMENT GROUP | $157,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL | $50,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES | $50,000 |
| BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK | $50,000 |
| NORTHAMPTON SURVIVAL CENTER | $50,000 |
| CURE ALZHEIMER'S FUND | $25,000 |
| THE TREVOR PROJECT | $10,000 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| WORCESTER ANIMAL RESCUE LEAGUE | $10,000 |
| ABBY'S HOUSE | $10,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL | $10,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $800k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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 +37% since the first grant, against +31% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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 FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $105k 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
- TETHOMPSON ECUMENICAL EMPOWERMENT GROUP INC8× · 2017–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +33%
BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC8× · 2017–2024 · $400k · revenue +49%- NSNORTHAMPTON SURVIVAL CENTER INC8× · 2017–2024 · $400k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- SGSCOTT GLASS DONOR ADVISED FUNDone grant, 2020 · $7.0M
- WLWYNDHAM LAND TRUST INCone grant, 2017 · $250k · revenue +15%
- TWTHE WINCHENDON SCHOOL INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $125k · revenue +31%
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.
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
Wentworth institute of technology is a nationally recognized private coeducational and residential university of higher education with a mission to empower, inspire and innovate through experiential learning with a core purpose of career…
Education and Research
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
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.
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…
Wpi transforms lives, turns knowledge into action to confront global challenges, and revolutionizes stem through distinctive and inclusive education, projects and research. (http://www.wpi.edu/about/mission.html)
Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.
As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.
The mission of westminster college is to help students develop competencies, commitments, and characteristics which have distinguished human beings at their best. see continuation on schedule o.the liberal arts tradition is the foundation…
Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc and the most unlike its peers is Abby Kelley Foster House Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 48 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
26 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. 26 of the 42 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 THOMPSON ECUMENICAL EMPOWERMENT GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHAMPTON SURVIVAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
- Who funds WYNDHAM LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds THE WINCHENDON SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds QUINNIPIAC UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ABBY KELLEY FOSTER HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds BENTLEY UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds ARLINGTON FREE CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds WORCESTER ANIMAL RESCUE LEAGUE INC ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EAGLE VALLEY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds POMFRET SCHOOL INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Institute for Responsible Technology ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds REACH OUT AND READ INC ↗
- Who funds TREVOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds OLD STURBRIDGE INC ↗
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: Fallon Community Health Plan Inc · Fidelity Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Glass 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Thompson Ecumenical Empowerment Group Inc — 24% of income from government
- Reach Out and Read Inc — 9% of income from government
- Old Sturbridge Inc — 4% of income from government
- Northampton Survival Center Inc — 3% of income from government
- Bentley University — 1% of income from government
- Wyndham Land Trust Inc — 1% of income from government
- Quinnipiac University — 0% of income from government
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.