· Private foundation
Sarfaty Siegel Foundation for the Future
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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k40 grants · $17k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $150,000 |
| WOLF TRAP FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| THE CREATIVE FORCE FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NW GA | $3,000 |
| FEEDING AMERICA | $2,650 |
| ROUND HOUSE THEATER RESILIENCE FUND | $1,200 |
| BALTIMORE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA | $1,200 |
| NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $600 |
| NEW VIRGINIA MAJORITY EDUCATION FUND | $330 |
| WOMENS CANCER RESOURCE CENTER | $259 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $250 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $250 |
| AVALON THEATRE | $250 |
| UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION | $250 |
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 (FY17–25, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +34% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
47 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 8 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, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
- GMGEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +37%
- WTWOLF TRAP FOUNDATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS5× · 2021–2025 · $38k · revenue +68%
Feeding America4× · 2020–2025 · $35k · revenue +40%
Funded once
- MHMT HEALTH PROF HEALTHY CLIMATEone grant, 2022 · $25k
- VOVIRGINIA ORGANIZING INCone grant, 2024 · $6k · revenue 0%
- SSOLAVIDAone grant, 2019 · $5k
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.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
The npr foundation ("foundation") is organized and operated exclusively for the benefit of its sole supported organization, national public radio, inc. ("npr inc."). the foundation supports npr inc. through various activities such as…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
See schedule oustelecom exists to ensure members can compete, grow and thrive to build a world where families, enterprises and communities are connected through the power of broadband.our member companies have committed a considerable…
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
To effectively and efficiently mitigate risks to the reliability and security of the western interconnection's bulk power system.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Accelerate Change Inc and the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. 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 45 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
48 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. 48 of the 81 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 GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WOLF TRAP FOUNDATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE WORLD FOOD PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds ECOAMERICA ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Children's Environmental Health Network ↗
- Who funds JOHN F KENNEDY CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds BETHESDA-CHEVY CHASE RESCUE SQUAD INC ↗
- Who funds PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA ORGANIZING INC ↗
- Who funds THE WASHINGTON BALLET ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds Womens Cancer Resource Center ↗
- Who funds MPT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL HERITAGE TRUST ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds Maternity Care Coalition ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
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: Tides Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · The Partnership Project Inc · Impactassetsinc · The Rockefeller Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Network for Good · American Endowment 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 Sarfaty Siegel Foundation for the Future 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.
- Baltimore Symphony Orchestra Inc — 11% of income from government
- Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc — 2% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Sarfaty Siegel Foundation for the Future?
Find your warmest path to Sarfaty Siegel Foundation for the Future 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.