Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Sawyer John M Mem Tr 92888

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.

$52k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Human Services$184kInternational$50k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $47k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$505k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEW ENGLAND$20,000
JEREMIAH PROGRAM$15,000
ALIANZA DV SERVICES$12,000
ROXBURY STONE HOUSE INC$5,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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.

area typical 11%ALIANZA DV SERVICES: $12k → 17%ALIANZA DV SERVICES: $12k → 17%ALIANZA DV SERVICES: $12k → 17%ALIANZA DV SERVICES: $12k → 17%ROXBURY STONE HOUSE INC: $5k → 16%ROXBURY STONE HOUSE INC: $5k → 16%ELIZABETH STONE HOUSE: $5k → 16%ROXBURY STONE HOUSE INC: $4k → 16%ELIZABETH STONE HOUSE: $4k → 16%ELIZABETH STONE HOUSE: $4k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$234k · 6 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

6 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
0

Total granted

$234k
$0

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCivil RightsHousing & ShelterOther

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

  • AD
    ALIANZA DV SERVICES INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $77k · revenue +67%
  • NB
    NEW BEDFORD WOMEN'S CENTER INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $50k · revenue +28%
  • JP
    JEREMIAH PROGRAM
    3× · 2023–2025 · $30k · revenue +18%

Funded once

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

    04Your field
    04the grantee network

    6 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

    0
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    1
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    6/6
    Grantees still filing
    4/6
    Grew since you first funded

    Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

    ALIANZA DV SERVICES INC — $77,000 · Human ServicesALIANZA DV SERVICES INCROXBURY STONE HOUSE INC — $27,000 · Human ServicesROXBURY STONE HOUSE INCNEW BEDFORD WOMEN'S CENTER INC — $50,000 · OtherNEW BEDFORD WOMEN'S CENTER INCNUDAY — $20,000 · OtherNUDAYINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEW ENGLAND INC — $30,000 · Civil RightsINTERNATIONAL …JEREMIAH PROGRAM — $30,000 · Housing & ShelterJEREMIAH PROGR…
    Human Services$104,000Other$70,000Civil Rights$30,000Housing & Shelter$30,000

    Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

    25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetALIANZA DV SERVICES INC — $77,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetNEW BEDFORD WOMEN'S CENTER INC — $50,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetINTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEW ENGLAND INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJEREMIAH PROGRAM — $30,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetROXBURY STONE HOUSE INC — $27,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetNUDAY — $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budget
    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.

    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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

    Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: 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 Sawyer John M Mem Tr 92888 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.

    2024
    202122232425
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 82%
    • New Bedford Women's Center Inc84% of income from government
    • Alianza Dv Services Inc82% of income from government
    • Roxbury Stone House Inc29% of income from government
    • International Institute of New England Inc24% of income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 6 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph