Skip to content
James and Chantal Sheridan Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

James and Chantal Sheridan 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.

$470k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$115k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Education$528kEnvironment$408kReligion$384kInternational$222kEmployment$115kHealth$40kCivil Rights$13kCrime & Legal$11kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k13 grants · $51k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $419k
$6,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$9.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YEAR UP$115,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND$115,000
CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA$113,600
BROWN UNIVERSITY$75,000
CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA$8,050
ACHILLES INTERNATIONAL$6,000
TEEN LINE$6,000
LIBERATION INSTITUTE$6,000
THOMAS BECKET FOUNDATION$6,000
PRISONERS' LEGAL SERVICES OF NEW YORK$6,000
CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA$5,650
GARY AND VIVIENNE PLAYER FOUNDATION$2,000
PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE$1,500
MYRIAD USA$1,400
THE FAMILY PANTRY OF CAPE COD$1,000
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.

US giving: 77% of grant dollars ($1.3M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 23% that went abroad ($409k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 88% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE: $2k → 7%THE FAMILY PANTRY OF CAPE COD: $1k → 8%PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES: $5k → 16%GARY AND VIVIENNE PLAYER FOUNDATION: $2k → 7%LIBERATION INSTITUTE: $6k → 10%TEEN LINE: $6k → 14%HEALTHY SCHOOL FOOD COALITION: $200 → 9%SALAAM BAALAK TRUST: $5k → 13%PRISONERS' LEGAL SERVICES OF NEW YORK: $6k → 14%WELOVEU: $500 → 14%MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CTR: $3k → 17%CARIBBEAN JEWISH COMMUNITY: $3k → 20%GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $5k → 14%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $3k → 9%FFLV USA: $10k → 7%BROWN UNIVERSITY: $75k → 14%WELOVEU FOUNDATION: $1k → 7%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $114k → 9%YEAR UP: $115k → 16%LIBERATION INSTITUTE: $5k → 10%YAD ELIE VIA AMERICA GIVES: $1k → 17%THE GLOBAL FUND FOR CHILDREN: $65k → 14%FAMILY CENTERS: $2k → 9%BROWN UNIVERSITY: $70k → 14%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $8k → 9%YEAR UP YOUNG ADULT TRAINING: $90k → 16%SISTERS OF LIFE: $5k → 17%THE GLOBAL FUND FOR CHILDREN: $25k → 14%BROWN UNIVERSITY: $45k → 14%CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $6k → 9%YEAR UP YOUNG ADULT TRAINING: $83k → 16%SISTERS OF LIFE: $5k → 17%BROWN UNIVERSITY: $35k → 14%YEAR UP YOUNG ADULT TRAINING: $60k → 16%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $115k → 17%BROWN UNIVERSITY: $10k → 14%YEAR UP YOUNG ADULT TRAINING: $55k → 16%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $90k → 17%THOMAS BECKET FOUNDATION: $6k → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $83k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $60k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $60k → 17%ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICE AT MT SINAI: $5k → 17%ACHILLES INTERNATIONAL: $6k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
MA
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
VA
DC

Beyond the US: 23% of all-years giving ($409k)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
United Kingdom$394k · 8 grants
India$15k · 2 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 20% of James and Chantal Sheridan Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

James and Chantal Sheridan Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 30% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 7 repeat orgs$201k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +121% since the first grant, against +16% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
13

Total granted

$1.2M
$56k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+121%
+16%

Still filing today

43%
23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 45% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $145k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureEducationEnvironmentPhilanthropyFood & NutritionHealthOther
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

  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    5× · 2020–2024 · $408k · revenue +121%
  • WL
    WEST LONDON SYNAGOGUE OF BRITISH
    4× · 2020–2023 · $371k
  • YU
    YEAR UP YOUNG ADULT TRAINING
    3× · 2020–2023 · $288k

Funded once

  • CW
    CHELSEA WESTMINISTER HOSPITAL
    one grant, 2022 · $14k
  • FU
    FFLV USA
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +16%
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
President and Fellows of Harvard College

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

Education
3
Boston Architectural College

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

—
4
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
5
The George Washington University

The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…

Education
6
The Baruch College Fund

The baruch college fund is an organization engaged in generating, encouraging and promoting the educational welfare of the students of the bernard m. baruch college of the city university of new york.

Education
7
Fordham University

Fordham university, the jesuit university of new york, is committed to the discovery of wisdom and the transmission of learning, through research and through education of the highest quality. for more information, see schedule o.

Education
8
Yale University

To improve the world through research, scholarship, education, preservation, and practice.

Education
9
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
10
Golden Gate University

Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…

Education
11
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
12
The Trustees of Princeton University

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…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Global Fund for Children; the most unlike its peers is Liberation Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 33 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)
16/17
Grantees still filing
9/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WEST LONDON SYNAGOGUE OF BRITISH: $371,038 · OtherWEST LONDON SYNAGOGUE OF BRITISHYEAR UP YOUNG ADULT TRAINING: $288,000 · OtherYEAR UP YOUNG ADULT TRAINING+22 more: $94,021 · Other+22 moreENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $408,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND…BROWN UNIVERSITY: $235,000 · Community ImprovementBROWN UNIVERSIT…CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $127,300 · Philanthropy+1 more: $2,000 · PhilanthropyYEAR UP INC: $115,000 · EducationGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $5,000 · EducationGLOBAL FUND FOR CHILDREN: $90,000 · Arts & CultureTHOMAS BECKET FOUNDATION: $6,000 · Arts & CultureLIBERATION INSTITUTE: $11,000 · Health
Other$753,059Environment$408,000Community Improvement$235,000Philanthropy$129,300Education$120,000Arts & Culture$96,000Health$11,000

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 budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $408,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetBROWN UNIVERSITY: $235,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $127,300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYEAR UP INC: $115,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBAL FUND FOR CHILDREN: $90,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetLIBERATION INSTITUTE: $11,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetPRISONERS' LEGAL SERVICES OF NEW YORK INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHOMAS BECKET FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetAchilles International Inc: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMYRIAD USA INC: $2,400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGARY AND VIVIENNE PLAYER FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAMILY CENTERS INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FAMILY PANTRY OF CAPE COD CORP: $1,000 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 James and Chantal Sheridan Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James and Chantal Sheridan Foundation. 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Family Centers Inc: 20% of income from government
  • Year Up Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 James and Chantal Sheridan Foundation?

Find your warmest path to James and Chantal Sheridan 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.

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 33 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on James and Chantal Sheridan’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