· Private foundation
Saxer Family 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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $405k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $370k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE GROWHAUS | $150,000 |
| SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN HIGHLANDS | $100,000 |
| UNION RESCUE MISSION | $60,000 |
| THE GATHERING PLACE A REFUGE FOR | $60,000 |
| WOMEN'S BEAN PROJECT | $40,000 |
| FRESH FOOD CONNECT | $40,000 |
| KABBALAH EXPERIENCE | $35,000 |
| Stephen Siller Tunnels to Towers FDN | $30,000 |
| MERCY SHIPS | $30,000 |
| GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC | $30,000 |
| HOPE HARBOR HOME INC | $25,000 |
| ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY | $25,000 |
| Jane Goodall Institute | $20,000 |
| North Carolina Land Trust | $20,000 |
| SHRINERS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN | $20,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY18–25, $760k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 95% 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 +47% since the first grant, against +33% for the ones you funded once.
25 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2025, 3 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, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- TGTHE GROWHAUS8× · 2018–2025 · $465k · revenue +208%
- URUNION RESCUE MISSION8× · 2018–2025 · $350k · revenue +155%
- GFGLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC8× · 2018–2025 · $270k · revenue +32%
Funded once
BALD HEAD ISLAND CONSERVANCY INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +33%
NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL LAND TRUSTone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue -35%- NCNOURISH COLORADOgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +340%
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.
Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.
Earthenable works to solve the housing crisis in africa by revolutionizing the rural housing industry through innovative, affordable, and sustainable home-building solutions. its mission is to create healthier, safer, and climate-resilient…
Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.
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…
New york restoration project ("nyrp") believes that nature is a fundamental right of every new yorker. nyrp works collaboratively with residents in communities across the five boroughs to renovate gardens, restore parks, plant trees,…
World coffee research unites the global coffee industry to drive science-based agricultural solutions to urgently secure a diverse and sustainable supply of quality coffee today and for generations to come. our mission is to grow, protect,…
Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…
The natural areas conservancy champions urban natural areas in new york city and across the nation through innovative research, partnerships, and advocacy. we increase the health and resilience of urban forests and wetlands, catalyze…
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
The aquarium of the pacific's mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect, and stewardship for the pacific ocean, its inhabitants, and ecosystems.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Global Fund for Women Inc and the most unlike its peers is North Carolina Coastal Land Trust. 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 34 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 6% 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.
26 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. 26 of the 30 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 THE GROWHAUS ↗
- Who funds UNION RESCUE MISSION ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S BEAN PROJECT ↗
- Who funds KABBALAH EXPERIENCE ↗
- Who funds Hope Harbor Home Inc ↗
- Who funds Southern Appalachian Highlands Conservancy ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Fresh Food Connect ↗
- Who funds THE PEOPLE CONCERN ↗
- Who funds ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds The Spikenard Farm Inc ↗
- Who funds Mercy Ships International ↗
- Who funds THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds Friends of Public Radio DBA WHQR ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL FEDERATION INC ↗
- Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND ENLIGHTENMENT INC ↗
- Who funds JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds THE ONETA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WEGIVEASHARE Inc ↗
- Who funds BALD HEAD ISLAND CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH CAROLINA COASTAL LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds NOURISH COLORADO ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES MISSION 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: Duke Energy Foundation · North Carolina Community Foundation · Foundation for the Carolinas · Colorado Gives Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Saxer Family 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- The Shriners' Hospital for Children — 6% 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.