Skip to content
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

Washington, D.C. · Public charity

Seabury Resources for Aging

Seabury Resources for Aging's mission is to provide personalized, affordable services and housing options to help older adults in the greater Washington, D.C. area live with independence and dignity.

$86k
Granted FY2017
2
Itemized grants FY2017
1
Organizations funded FY2017
Read the full brief

Read this first · the figures below need context

50% of Seabury Resources for Aging’s FY2017 grant dollars went to Greater Washington Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2017 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Itemized, FY2017
$75k
The rest is grants the schedule does not break out
Median grant, FY2017
$37,445
Largest grant, FY2017
$37,445
States reached, FY2017
1
Total assets, FY2017
$10M

Top grantees

Largest recipients by total granted, FY2017 to FY2017, and the share of each one’s budget the grants supplied at peak.

GranteeTotal grantedYearsShare of their budget
University of DC Foundation Inc$37,44412%

Compare Seabury Resources for Aging with peer funders

About Seabury Resources for Aging

How much does Seabury Resources for Aging give?
Seabury Resources for Aging reported 2 itemized grants totaling $74,889, out of $86,059 in total grant expense reported on the return in its FY2017 IRS filing.
What does Seabury Resources for Aging fund?
By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2017, its largest causes are Education (100%).
Who are Seabury Resources for Aging's largest grantees?
By total granted over FY2017 to FY2017: University of DC Foundation Inc ($37k).
Where is Seabury Resources for Aging based?
Seabury Resources for Aging is based in DC.

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 2 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2017, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Seabury Resources for Aging’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