· Private foundation
Paul & Elaine Chervinsky Charitable 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 42% of PAUL & ELAINE CHERVINSKY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k40 grants · $56k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $350k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HEBREW SENIOR LIFE | $200,000 |
| UMASS DARTMOUTH | $100,000 |
| BUTTONWOOD PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY | $50,000 |
| TEMPLE EMANUEL | $5,108 |
| NEW BEDFORD WHALING MUSEUM | $5,000 |
| TIFERETH ISRAEL | $3,990 |
| BAKER CENTER FOR CHILDREN | $3,160 |
| JEWISH NATIONAL FUND | $2,600 |
| UNITED WAY OF NEW BEDFORD | $2,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| ANTI DEFAMMATION LEAGUE | $2,500 |
| MOBILE MINISTRIES OF NEW BEDFORD | $2,500 |
| BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,000 |
| SIMMONS UNIVERSITY | $1,899 |
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 (FY17–24, $28k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those 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.
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.
55 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 36 since wound down; 23 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, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $78k 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
- HSHebrew Senior Life Inc9× · 2017–2025 · $858k · revenue +35%
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM9× · 2017–2025 · $109k · revenue +206%
- JBJUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER8× · 2017–2024 · $23k · revenue +124%
Funded once
- SCSOUTHCOAST COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $50k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $5k
- NBNEW BEDFORD NEEDIEST FAMILIES FUNDone grant, 2017 · $1k
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 bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Northeast college of health sciences (the college) is committed to academic excellence, leadership, and professional best practices in the health sciences.
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 mission of Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network (DFCCN) is to promote and support, directly or indirectly, the interests and purposes of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI).
Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service
To advance medical knowledge, to develop and maintain the highest professional and ethical standards of medical practice and health care, and to promote medical institutions formed on liberal principles for the health, benefit, and welfare…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Boston university affiliated physicians, inc.'s (buap) primary mission is to provide health care services in a manner that promotes health for the benefit of the community, to perform medical and clinical research in the public interest,…
Wentworth institute of technology is a nationally recognized private coeducational and residential university of higher education with a mission to empower, inspire and innovate through experiential learning with a core purpose of career…
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Newbridge on the charles inc and the most unlike its peers is Share 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 46 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
51 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. 51 of the 126 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 Hebrew Senior Life Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds BUTTONWOOD PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER NEW BEDFORD INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of Buttonwood Park Inc ↗
- Who funds JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER ↗
- Who funds SOUTHCOAST COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Old Dartmouth Historical Society ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF GREATER NEW BEDFORD INC ↗
- Who funds SIMMONS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc ↗
- Who funds JEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER BOSTON FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds NEW BEDFORD JEWISH CONVALESCENT HOME INC ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
- Who funds Dedham Food Pantry Charitable Trust ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL BENEVOLENT SOCIETY ↗
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: Southcoast Community Foundation Inc · The Carney Family Charitable Foundation · Bristol County Savings Charitable Foundation Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · New Bedford Day Nursery Inc · Willow Creek Charitable Foundation U/A/D 01/11/2002 · Rockland Trust Charitable Foundation Inc · Arbella Insurance Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Enable Hope Foundation · Alvord Family 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 Paul & Elaine Chervinsky Charitable 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.
- United Way of Greater New Bedford Inc — 35% of income from government
- Judge Baker Children's Center — 29% of income from government
- Greater Boston Food Bank Inc — 22% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Pine Street Inn Inc — 11% of income from government
- Southcoast Community Foundation Inc — 10% of income from government
- Boys & Girls Clubs of Dorchester Inc — 7% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Zeiterion Theatre Inc — 4% of income from government
- Boys & Girls Clubs of Boston Inc — 2% of income from government
- Boys & Girls Club of Greater New Bedford Inc — 2% of income from government
- Old Dartmouth Historical Society — 2% of income from government
- National Yiddish Book Center Inc — 2% of income from government
- Simmons University — 1% of income from government
- Hebrew Senior Life Inc — 0% of income from government
- Our Sisters School — 0% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 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.