Skip to content
Judi & George Schwartz Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Judi & George Schwartz Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$285k
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
—
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$2.0MReligion$80kCivil Rights$45kEmployment$15kInternational$10kHealth$5kOther$0
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $175,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $285,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $110,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$20,000
Median grant
—
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Sacred Heart Major Seminary$25,000
Royal Palm Academy$25,000
Father Gabriel Richard High School$25,000
Catholic Central High School$20,000
Our Lady of Good Counsel$20,000
Catholic League$20,000
Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist$15,000
Corporate Morality Action Ctr.$15,000
St. Francis Education Trust Fund$10,000
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 17%Royal Palm Academy: $5k → 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.
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.

49%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$185k · 3 repeat orgs$195k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$185k
$85k

Still filing today

0%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $110k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’23
EducationReligionCivil RightsInternationalHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • SH
    Sacred Heart Major Seminary
    2× · 2021–2023 · $125k
  • CC
    Catholic Central High School
    2× · 2020–2023 · $30k
  • OL
    Our Lady of Good Counsel
    2× · 2020–2023 · $30k

Funded once

  • RM
    RENEWAL MINISTRIES INC
    one grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue +0%
  • CA
    Corporate Action Morality Center
    one grant, 2021 · $15k
  • CL
    CATH LEAGUE FOR RELIGIOUS & CIVIL RIGHTSgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +80%
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 17 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Sacred Heart Major Seminary: $125,000 · OtherSacred Heart Major SeminaryCatholic Central High School: $30,000 · OtherCatholic Central High SchoolOur Lady of Good Counsel: $30,000 · OtherOur Lady of Good CounselRoyal Palm Academy: $25,000 · OtherRoyal Palm AcademyFather Gabriel Richard High School: $25,000 · OtherFather Gabriel Richard High SchoolCatholic League: $20,000 · OtherCatholic LeagueCorporate Action Morality Center: $15,000 · OtherCorporate Morality Action Ctr.: $15,000 · OtherSisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist: $15,000 · Other+1 more: $10,000 · OtherRENEWAL MINISTRIES INC: $20,000 · ReligionTHOMAS AQUINAS COLLEGE: $10,000 · EducationMadonna University: $10,000 · EducationCATH LEAGUE FOR RELIGIOUS & CIVIL RIGHTS: $10,000 · Civil RightsHUMAN LIFE INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 · InternationalDAMES AND KNIGHTS OF THE ORDER OF MALTA MEDICAL AND DENTAL CLINIC OF: $5,000 · HealthROYAL PALM ACADEMY INC: $5,000 · Human Services
Other$310,000Religion$20,000Education$20,000Civil Rights$10,000International$10,000Health$5,000Human Services$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRENEWAL MINISTRIES INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCATH LEAGUE FOR RELIGIOUS & CIVIL RIGHTS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHUMAN LIFE INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHOMAS AQUINAS COLLEGE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMadonna University: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAMES AND KNIGHTS OF THE ORDER OF MALTA MEDICAL AND DENTAL CLINIC OF: $5,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetROYAL PALM ACADEMY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds RENEWAL MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds CATH LEAGUE FOR RELIGIOUS & CIVIL RIGHTS ↗
  • Who funds HUMAN LIFE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds THOMAS AQUINAS COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds Madonna University ↗
  • Who funds DAMES AND KNIGHTS OF THE ORDER OF MALTA MEDICAL AND DENTAL CLINIC OF ↗
  • Who funds ROYAL PALM ACADEMY INC ↗

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.

Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA8.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Judi & George Schwartz Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Judi & George Schwartz Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 Judi & George Schwartz Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Judi & George Schwartz 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 17 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $915k of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Judi & George Schwartz’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