Loading…

MAUDE PRITCHARD CHAR TRUST XXXXX2009

Foundation Dossiers

· Private foundation

MAUDE PRITCHARD CHAR TRUST XXXXX2009

This foundation accepts unsolicited grant applications.

$810k

Granted FY2024

16

Grants

2

Communities

$100k

Largest

01What you fundRead

03Your edgeRead

04Your fieldRead

05Through PlinthRead

01What you fund

01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 53% of MAUDE PRITCHARD CHAR TRUST XXXXX2009’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2020

—

2021

museum

2022

museum

2023

museum

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

$10k–50k7 grants · $210k
$50k–250k9 grants · $600k

$50,000

Median grant

2

States reached

$21M

Total assets

Largest grants

NEW HOUR FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN$100,000
THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND$100,000
BANK STREET COLLEGE$100,000
LONG ISLAND CARES INC$50,000
SUFFOLK COUNTY VANDERBILT MUSEUM$50,000
MERCY HAVEN$50,000
HEALTH AND WELFARE COUNCIL OF$50,000
LGBT NETWORK$50,000
DOCS FOR TOTS$50,000
COMMUNITY ACTION SOUTHOLD TOWN INC$30,000
ST MARKS EPISCOPAL CHURCH$30,000
HELEN KELLER SERVICES HKSB$30,000
FARMS FOR CITY KIDS FOUNDATION$30,000
THREE VILLAGE MEALS ON WHEELS INC$30,000
WYANDANCH HOMES AND PROPERTY$30,000

02The need

04

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $350k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8% — the area typically sits at 8%. 29% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$3.1M · 22 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +101% since the first grant, against +49% 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22

16

Total granted

$3.1M

$915k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+101%

+49%

Still filing today

59%

69%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $260k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesArts & CultureHealthEnvironmentEducationHousing & ShelterOther

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

THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND
4× · 2021–2024 · $325k · revenue +117%
CA
COMMUNITY ACTION SOUTHOLD TOWN INC
4× · 2021–2024 · $180k · revenue +706%
DF
DOCS FOR TOTS
3× · 2021–2024 · $150k · revenue +486%

Funded once

SB
STONY BROOK FOUNDATION
one grant, 2021 · $150k · revenue +7%
GS
GOOD SHEPHERD HOSPICE CATHOLIC
one grant, 2022 · $100k
SC
ST CHARLES HOSPITAL CORP
one grant, 2023 · $90k · revenue +25%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1

Long Island Community Hospital At

Long island community hospital at nyu langone health (d/b/a long island community hospital) ("lich"), was established to deliver accessible high-quality health services in a focused caring and teaching environment while providing health…

—

2

Long Island Partnership Clt Housing

To provide housing within nassau and suffolk counties in new york for "persons of low income", as defined in any federal or state low income housing capital program or other type of affordable housing program.

Housing & Shelter

3

Long Island University

Provide excellence and access in education to those who seek to expand their knowledge. see sch o.

—

4

Long Island Cares Inc

Our mission is to bring together all available resources for the benefit of the hungry on Long Island, and provide to the best of our ability for the humanitarian needs of our community.

Human Services

5

Community Health Action of Staten

Community health action of staten island drives dramatic improvements in the health of new yorkers.

Unclassified

6

North Shore-Lij Occupational Medicine Pc

North Shore-LIJ Occupational Medicine, PC strives to improve the health of the communities it serves and is committed to providing the highest quality clinical care.

Health

7

The Long Island City Partnership Inc

A neighborhood development organization for long island city, queens.

Community Improvement

8

Community Health Initiatives Inc

Chi is a federally qualified health center providing comprehensive primary care needs to coney island residents regardless of ability to pay and offering discounts for eligible uninsured residents.

Health

9

South Nassau Communities Hospital Inc

Committed to providing quality, comprehensive and easily accessible healthcare services to all residents of the south shore communities in a manner that reflects a culture of excellence, personalized, culturally competent care and…

Health

10

Long Island Housing Services Inc

The elimination of unlawful housing discrimination and promotion of decent and affordable housing through advocacy and education.

Housing & Shelter

11

New York Ehealth Collaborative Inc

To improve healthcare for all new yorkers through health information technology ("health it"). nyec's mission is to improve healthcare by collaboratively leading, connecting, & integrating health information exchange across the state.

Health

12

Healthcare Choices Ny Inc

Healthcare choices ny, inc. mission is to provide efficient and reliable primary, multi-specialty, and preventative health care in a personalized and compassionate manner to help people improve the quality of their lives.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Options for Community Living Inc and the most unlike its peers is Tides Center. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 37 years old; the field is 17. 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.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/28

the rest of the field

9%

3,263/36,703

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.

05the grantee network

27 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

0

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

9

Early backer (in before they grew)

27/27

Grantees still filing

24/27

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$2,530,000Environment$405,000Human Services$350,000Education$250,000Housing & Shelter$241,000Arts & Culture$230,000Health$220,000

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.

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.

The New York Community TrustNY30.6× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The New York Community Trust · The Marilyn Lichtman Foundation · Td Charitable Foundation · Mother Cabrini Health Foundation Inc · Pseg Foundation Inc · Investors Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Frank J Antun Foundation · Webster Bank Charitable Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust

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 organisation MAUDE PRITCHARD CHAR TRUST XXXXX2009 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: LA FUERZA UNIDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~29 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 7.1× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 113613094 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on LA FUERZA UNIDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 29 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 12% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Maude Pritchard Char Trust Xxxxx2009?

Find your warmest path to Maude Pritchard Char Trust Xxxxx2009 through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

More from the funding graph

The regranting layer

51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary

The DAF merry-go-round

$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds

Strange bedfellows

the named clusters of US funding

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

where grant money is based, and what stays home

State money flows

the interactive map of money crossing state lines