· Private foundation
Maxwell Sedel Family Foundation Inc
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2023–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k6 grants · $21k
- $10k–50k14 grants · $201k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $370k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TEMPLE ISRAEL | $250,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $100,000 |
| SHARSHERET | $100,000 |
| KESHETORG | $100,000 |
| 7 LAKES ALLIANCE BELGRADE MAINE | $70,000 |
| THE JONAH MACCABEE FOUNDATION INC | $25,000 |
| EQUALITY FUND (BOSTON FOUNDATION) | $25,000 |
| ISRAAID (US) GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC | $25,000 |
| JOAN G LOVERING HEALTH CENTER | $20,000 |
| BOSTON CHAMBER MUSIC SOCIETY | $15,000 |
| QT LIBRARY (FRACTURED ATLAS) | $10,870 |
| HRC FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| RAINBOW RAILROAD USA | $10,000 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| JELF JEWISH EDUCATIONAL LOAN FUND | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY23–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 50% of your 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +13% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.
8 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $202k 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
- SISharsheret Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $110k · revenue +13%
- TFTHE FEMINIST HEALTH CENTER OF PORTSMOUTH INC2× · 2023–2024 · $30k · revenue +33%
- BCBoston Chamber Music Society Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $25k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- CHCAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -1%
- LVLIVERMORE VALLEY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERone grant, 2023 · $3k
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.
The jewish alliance for law and social action (jalsa), a massachusetts-based social justice organization, puts our jewish values into action by engaging the community in promoting civil rights and protecting civil liberties, and…
Healthq is committed to providing sexual and reproductive healthcare without judgment or barriers.
The mission of Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston, Inc. is the following: * To sustain and enrich the quality of Jewish life in the Greater Boston Jewish community by creating and enhancing a sense of common purpose. * To…
Aclu foundation of ma was established to defend freedoms guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights through public education and litigation.
The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.
Mjhs health system is a charitable not-for-profit established to support the activities of affiliated organizations. mjhs is built on the core values of compassion, dignity and respect, first established by the four brooklyn ladies in…
Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service
The Jane Fund of Central Massachusetts is dedicated to funding abortion and supporting bodily autonomy in Central Massachusetts and beyond.
Mass general brigham health plan's mission is to promote the health and wellness of our members, and to help ensure equitable, affordbale health care for the diverse communities we serve.
The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cambridge Health Alliance Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Cambridge Reproductive Health Consultants. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 28 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 Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds Sharsheret Inc ↗
- Who funds Jonah Maccabee Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds ISRAAID US GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC ↗
- Who funds THE FEMINIST HEALTH CENTER OF PORTSMOUTH INC ↗
- Who funds Boston Chamber Music Society Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CAMBRIDGE HEALTH ALLIANCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TREVOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW RAILROAD USA INC ↗
- Who funds TREE OF LIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD CEREBRAL PALSY CAMP INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S LUNCH PLACE INC ↗
- Who funds CAMBRIDGE REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CONSULTANTS ↗
- Who funds WGBH Educational Foundation ↗
- Who funds Jewish Federation of Cincinnati ↗
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: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Maxwell Sedel Family Foundation Inc 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.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Women's Lunch Place Inc — 8% of income from government
- Sharsheret Inc — 4% of income from government
- Boston Chamber Music Society Inc — 2% of income from government
- Wgbh Educational Foundation — 1% 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 Maxwell Sedel Family Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Maxwell Sedel Family Foundation Inc 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.