Skip to content
Samuel Burtoff Md Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Samuel Burtoff Md Foundation Inc

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$584k
Granted FY2026still arriving
3
Grants FY2026still arriving
2
States reached
$409k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$405kReligion$89kArts & Culture$80kEducation$52kFood & Nutrition$35kHuman Services$12kCivil Rights$11kInternational$9kOther$0
02FY2026 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $166k
  • $250k+1 grant · $409k
$166,046
Median grant
2
States reached
$192k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Washington Hebrew congregation$408,758
Treatment and Learning Center$166,046
washington Hebrew Congregation$8,868
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–22, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%NEADS: $10k → 11%JEWISH COUNCIL FOR THE AGING: $1k → 8%NEADS: $1k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 9 repeat orgs$273k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +29% since the first grant, against +16% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2026, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
11

Total granted

$1.0M
$107k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+16%

Still filing today

78%
45%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $166k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
HealthHuman ServicesEducationArts & CultureHousing & ShelterInternationalOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • SM
    SIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    5× · 2017–2024 · $254k · revenue +157%
  • FF
    FOOD & FRIENDS INC
    2× · 2018–2022 · $20k · revenue +158%
  • NI
    NEADS INC
    2× · 2020–2022 · $11k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • GU
    GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +16%
  • TT
    TLC - The Treatment & Learning Centers
    one grant, 2025 · $20k · revenue 0%
  • SP
    SHALOM PRESCHOOL
    one grant, 2018 · $15k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Adventist Healthcare Inc

We extend god's care through the ministry of physical, mental and spiritual healing.

—
2
Lucy Webb Hayes National Training School for Deaconesses & Missionaries

Sibley memorial hospital in washington, d.c., a member of johns hopkins medicine, has a distinguished history of serving the community since its founding in 1890. as a not-for-profit, full-service community hospital, sibley offers…

Health
3
Washington Dc Meals on Wheels Inc

We deliver healthy delicious meals to our home-bound neighbors. With a vision of creating a more interconnected resilient and compassionate community our program supports entire family systems. In 2024 236 volunteers delivered 55,642 meals…

—
4
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…

Health
5
Children's National

Children's national coordinates the overall policy and activities of the affiliated organizations. see schedule o.

Health
6
Parker Jewish Institute for Health Care and Rehabilitation

To provide with compassion and dedication superior quality health care and rehabilitation for adults and to directly or indirectly coordinate arrangements and provision for comprehensive health care and social support services to frail…

Health
7
Nysarc Inc New York City Chapter

We are committed to helping people with intellectual (cont. on schedule o) and developmental disabilities to live full lives.

Human Services
8
Jewish Family & Career Services Inc

To transform lives.

Human Services
9
Goodlife Innovations Inc

Goodlife's mission is to make a meaningful difference in the everyday lives of individuals who need help to live more independently (individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities, brain injuries, physical or age-related…

Human Services
10
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o

Health
11
Jewish Family Services of Greenwich

Jewish family services of greenwich (jfs) is a nonprofit social service agency dedicated to strengthening individuals and families in fairfield and new london counties. jfs provides behavioral health counseling, food security programs,…

—
12
Gaylord Hospital Inc

To enhance health, maximize function and transform lives.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sibley Memorial Hospital Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Lillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 21 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WASHINGTON HEBREW CONGREGATION: $506,615 · OtherWASHINGTON HEBREW CONGREGATIONTreatment and Learning Center: $166,046 · OtherTreatment and Learning CenterSIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL: $105,000 · OtherSIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL+8 more: $81,280 · Other+8 moreSIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $253,548 · HealthSIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL…FOOD & FRIENDS INC: $20,000 · HealthFOOD & FRIENDS INC+1 more: $6,000 · HealthLillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum: $80,000 · Arts & CultureGALLAUDET UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · EducationA WIDER CIRCLE INC: $12,000 · EducationNEADS INC: $11,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH COUNCIL FOR THE AGING OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $9,000 · InternationalFriendship Place: $1,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$858,941Health$279,548Arts & Culture$80,000Education$37,000Human Services$12,000International$9,000Housing & Shelter$1,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $253,548 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetLillian and Albert Small Capital Jewish Museum: $80,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetGALLAUDET UNIVERSITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD & FRIENDS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTLC - The Treatment & Learning Centers: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetA WIDER CIRCLE INC: $12,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNEADS INC: $11,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSOME INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM: $9,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S INN AT NIH INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFriendship Place: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COUNCIL FOR THE AGING OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

The Morris and Gwendo…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz FoundationDC13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Samuel Burtoff Md Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Samuel Burtoff Md Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 6%
  • Children's Inn at Nih Inc: 10% of income from government
  • A Wider Circle Inc: 6% of income from government
  • Neads Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 21 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Samuel Burtoff Md’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home