· Private foundation
Joseph & Katherine Macari Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
100% of Joseph & Katherine Macari Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to National Philanthropic Trust, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2024, the last year Joseph & Katherine Macari Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 11 organizations, $291k. 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k15 grants · $41k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST | $250,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | $5,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS USA | $5,000 |
| CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY | $3,500 |
| AUDUBON | $3,000 |
| JOCOTOCO CONSERVATION FUND | $3,000 |
| 350ORG | $3,000 |
| RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK | $3,000 |
| CARE - GIFT CENTER | $2,500 |
| UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES | $2,000 |
| CITY MEALS ON WHEELS | $2,000 |
| FRESH AIR FUND | $2,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND | $2,000 |
| AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL | $2,000 |
| CITY HARVEST | $1,500 |
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 (FY17–18, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
46 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 33 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call). Read against FY2024, 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 FY2024, 11% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $253k 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
- BOBILLION OYSTER PROJECT INC5× · 2018–2022 · $72k · revenue +318%
- LILEADERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CHARTER SCHOOL6× · 2017–2022 · $64k · revenue +34%
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC6× · 2017–2023 · $61k · revenue +41%
Funded once
- TCTHE CHILD CENTER OF NY INCone grant, 2023 · $75k · revenue +4%
- MSMEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERINGone grant, 2018 · $6k
ISLES INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +158%
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
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…
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;…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Philanthropic Trust and the most unlike its peers is Paws for Purple Hearts. 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 42 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% 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 10% 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.
51 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. 51 of the 85 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 NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST ↗
- Who funds THE CHILD CENTER OF NY INC ↗
- Who funds BILLION OYSTER PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds LEADERS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD CHARTER SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ALICE JAMES POETRY COOPERATIVE ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds POETS HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST TRUST ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GREENPEACE INC ↗
- Who funds FRESH AIR FUND ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds CITYMEALS-ON-WHEELS ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds Rainforest Action Network ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL FOR AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE AND TEC ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK FOR NEW YORK CITY ↗
- Who funds CAVE CANEM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds ISLES INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds CITY HARVEST INC ↗
- Who funds GROUP FOR THE EAST END 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: The Hyde and Watson Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Joseph & Katherine Macari 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.
- Isles Inc — 21% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Joseph & Katherine Macari Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Joseph & Katherine Macari 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.