· Private foundation
Ogden Codman Tr Uwo Dorothy Sfm Codman
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k8 grants · $157k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TOWN OF LINCOLN | $100,000 |
| ST VINCENT DE PAUL SOCIETY ST JOSEPH CONFERENCE | $35,000 |
| FRIENDS OF MINUTE MAN NATIONAL PARK | $25,000 |
| HISTORIC NEW ENGLAND | $25,000 |
| CODMAN COMMUNITY FARMS INC | $25,000 |
| LINCOLN PARKS AND RECREATION | $15,000 |
| THE WALDON WOODS PROJECT | $12,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY | $10,000 |
| LINCOLN PUBLIC SCHOOLS | $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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of your 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 15% of Ogden Codman Tr Uwo Dorothy Sfm Codman’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in MA; read by stated purpose it is 83% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
14 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 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, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k 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
- CCCODMAN COMMUNITY FARMS INC7× · 2019–2025 · $307k · revenue +219%
- SFSOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF NEW ENGL6× · 2019–2025 · $243k · revenue +502%
MASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC5× · 2019–2025 · $100k · revenue +16%
Funded once
- MGMAGIC GARDEN INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +37%
- LPLINCOLN PUBLIC LIBRARYone grant, 2019 · $12k
- LMLINCOLN METCO COORDINATING COMMITTEEone grant, 2020 · $11k
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.
Conservation and preservation of land.
Kestrel land trust conserves and cares for forests, farms, and riverways in the connecticut river valley of western massachusetts while nurturing an enduring love of the land
Our mission is to spark people's curiosity to explore, steward, and find peace and joy in nature. in service to this, norman bird sanctuary inspires, builds, and engages a community of stewards who preserve, protect, enjoy, and learn from…
It is the mission of the natural resources trust of easton (nrt) to educate the public of significant natural and cultural resources and to acquire and preserve land of special character for the benefit of the public.
Preservation of open space
The princeton land trust was formed to preserve the natural beauty and rural character of the town of princeton.
Land preservation
The mission of the mount desert land & garden preserve is to conserve and share the beauty of our historic lands and gardens.
Manchester essex conservation trust preserves in perpetuity the natural beauty, wildlife habitat, and open space resources in our two towns and adjacent communities. we protect this land through acquisitions, conservation restrictions,…
Non-profit organization under chapter 180 of the general laws of the commonwealth of massachusetts to promote and protect undeveloped land primarily situation in the town of monterey, ma
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Trustees of Reservations and the most unlike its peers is Magic Garden Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 20 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 CODMAN COMMUNITY FARMS INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF NEW ENGL ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF RESERVATIONS ↗
- Who funds RURAL LAND FOUNDATION OF LINCOLN ↗
- Who funds MINUTE MAN NATIONAL PARK ASSOC INC ↗
- Who funds The Food Project Inc ↗
- Who funds MAGIC GARDEN INC ↗
- Who funds DECORDOVA AND DANA MUSEUM & PARK ↗
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: Boston Foundation 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 Ogden Codman Tr Uwo Dorothy Sfm Codman 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.
- Society for the Preservation of New Engl — 2% of income from government
- The Trustees of Reservations — 2% of income from government
- Massachusetts Audubon Society Inc — 1% of income from government
- Minute Man National Park Assoc Inc — 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 Ogden Codman Tr Uwo Dorothy Sfm Codman?
Find your warmest path to Ogden Codman Tr Uwo Dorothy Sfm Codman 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.