· Private foundation
Kenneth R Siger 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $6,267 |
| RECESSARTORG | $5,000 |
| THE TREVOR PROJECT | $3,102 |
| AMERICAN WHITEWATER | $2,624 |
| THIRTEENWNET | $2,500 |
| NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO | $2,500 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $2,108 |
| ISLAMIC RELIEF USA | $2,067 |
| PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND | $2,066 |
| SAVE THE CHILDREN | $2,044 |
| NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $2,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $2,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE CHEAT | $1,545 |
| COMMUNITY HELP IN PARK SLOPE | $1,060 |
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 (FY25–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 51% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
17 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
- AWAmerican Whitewater5× · 2021–2025 · $12k · revenue +14%
- NPNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION4× · 2021–2025 · $9k · revenue +175%
- IRISLAMIC RELIEF USA3× · 2021–2025 · $7k · revenue +8%
Funded once
DIRECT RELIEFone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +8%- CACLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +59%
- NANative American Heritage Associationgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $3k · 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.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
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.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
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…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…
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…
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Pact is a nonprofit organization that builds evidence-based, data-driven, and community-led solutions for human development (continued in schedule o)
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Action Against Hunger - Usa and the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. 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 35 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% 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 13% 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.
42 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. 42 of the 59 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 American Whitewater ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ISLAMIC RELIEF USA ↗
- Who funds GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds PROSPECT PARK ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds Outdoor Alliance ↗
- Who funds TREVOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Native American Heritage Association ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHEAT INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL COUNCIL OF TEACHERS OF ENGLISH ↗
- Who funds FABSCRAP INC ↗
- Who funds ACTION AGAINST HUNGER - USA ↗
- Who funds CITY HARVEST INC ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR RAINFOREST NATIONS SECRETARIAT ↗
- Who funds THE SENTENCING PROJECT ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HELP IN PARK SLOPE INC ↗
- Who funds Pride Center of Vermont Inc ↗
- Who funds CRAFT EMERGENCY RELIEF FUND INC ↗
- Who funds PANORAMA GLOBAL ↗
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 Pfizer Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Kenneth R Siger 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.
- Safe Passage Inc — 55% of income from government
- Newark Public Radio Inc — 51% of income from government
- Pride Center of Vermont Inc — 37% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Team River Runner Incorporated — 19% of income from government
- Manna Food Bank Inc — 8% of income from government
- American Whitewater — 5% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 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 Kenneth R Siger Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Kenneth R Siger 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.