How much did SELECT EQUITY GROUP FOUNDATION grant in FY2025?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 53% of SELECT EQUITY GROUP FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

scholarships financialfinancial aidlifeline tourtour simchasimcha dinadina franklincharitywater

2019

disabled armyarmy veteransveterans davlakes educationcaringkindnotestephen hungary

2020

covid responsenaacp legallegal defensedirect relieftourobreastiesblack child

2021

blood clotbellport baysewa internationalaudre lordepatriots pathpath bsaconvent sacred

2022

ukraine reliefkorean rescuefinaid scholarshipslung cancergreeneclinton hillmutual aid

2023

disaster reliefrelief israelisrael emergencymilestonefinaid scholarshipsachilles internationalstephen siller

2025

milestonedisaster reliefinadcurecompass workingworking capitalgalacommon justice

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2025 · 809 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k670 grants · $1.0M
$10k–50k88 grants · $1.8M
$50k–250k49 grants · $3.7M
$250k+2 grants · $759k

$1,500

Median grant

States reached

$45M

Total assets

Largest grants

NEW YORK UNIVERSITY$500,000
CAF AMERICA$259,258
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY$200,000
GROUNDTRUTH PROJECT REPORT FOR AMERICA$175,000
THE INSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP$160,000
DREAM$150,000
DARKNESS TO LIGHT$128,250
INADCURE FOUNDATION$100,640
HOSPICE CARE NETWORK$88,500
LEAD EXPOSURE ELIMINATION PROJECT$86,112
CHADTOUGH DEFEAT DIPG$82,560
JANE COFFIN CHILDS$82,440
SANDY HOOK PROMISE FOUNDATION$80,000
SAFE HORIZON$76,960
WORKFORCE OPPORTUNITY SERVICES$73,950

02The need

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 (FY17–25, $2.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 9%. 88% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 6% of SELECT EQUITY GROUP FOUNDATION’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 58% of the giving stays in NY; read by stated purpose it is 54% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

SELECT EQUITY GROUP FOUNDATIONlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$44M · 752 repeat orgs$3.0M to everyone else

752 repeat relationships — 346 still active in FY2025, 406 since wound down; 166 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

752

857

Total granted

$44M

$2.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%

Still filing today

55%

46%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $640k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationHuman ServicesHealthArts & CultureInternationalAnimalsOther

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

NY
New York University
4× · 2017–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +59%
Equal Justice Initiative
9× · 2017–2025 · $930k · revenue +92%
UG
Upwardly Global
9× · 2017–2025 · $692k · revenue +395%

Funded once

IC
International Center of Photography
one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -63%
LE
LEAD EXPOSURE ELIMINATION PROJECT
one grant, 2024 · $96k
PP
Pet Partners
one grant, 2021 · $81k

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

04Your field

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.

New York Foundation for the Arts Inc

To empower artists at critical stages in their creative lives

Arts & Culture

New York School of Interior Design

New york school of interior design provides the most innovative, immersive, and transformative interior design education in the world, demonstrating the impact of professionally designed interiors on the health, happiness, and well-being…

Education

University of New Haven

See schedule ouniversity of new haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts & professional education.

Education

Witness Inc

Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…

International

Global Fund for Children

To advance the rights and opportunities of children and youth worldwide.

Arts & Culture

American Jewish World Service Inc

We work to realize human rights and end poverty in africa, asia, latin america and the caribbean.

International

The Nasdaq Entrepreneurial Center Inc

Deliver world-class resources and mentoring to enable every entrepreneur across the globe to realize their maximum potential.

Arts & Culture

Open New York Education Inc

Housing & Shelter

New York City Energy Efficiency

Delivering financing solutions and advancing markets for energy efficiency and clean energy.

Environment

Boston Architectural College

Founded 131 years ago, the boston architectural college is a recognized institution providing excellence in practice-integrated design education to members of diverse communities with students representing 35 countries. the bac offers…

—

National Council of Jewish Women

Inspired by jewish values, the national council of jewish women is a grassroots organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children, and families, and by safeguarding…

Community Improvement

United States Naval Institute

To advance professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New York Cares Inc and the most unlike its peers is Nova Ukraine. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 29 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.4% lost their exemption, against 8% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.4%4/978

the rest of the field

10,115/119,782

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.

06the grantee network

921 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

286

Early backer (in before they grew)

904/921

Grantees still filing

708/921

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$29,124,542Education$5,375,734Arts & Culture$2,892,776Human Services$2,638,065Crime & Legal$2,509,500Civil Rights$2,172,701Health$1,990,864

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.

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.

The Hyde and Watson FoundationNJ38× affinity34 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Hyde and Watson Foundation · The Tapestry Foundation Inc · The New York Community Trust · The Warburg Pincus Foundation · The Lazard Charitable Foundation · Booth Ferris Foundation Xxxxx4008 · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · The Rockefeller Foundation · Viking Global Foundation Inc · Lily Auchincloss Foundation Inc · Pinkerton Foundation · American Express 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 organisation SELECT EQUITY GROUP 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

14get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Extreme Kids and Crew Inc.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

medium risk

~4 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 352392415 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on Extreme Kids and Crew Inc, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 4 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 24% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Select Equity Group Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Select Equity Group Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

More from the funding graph

The regranting layer

51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary

The DAF merry-go-round

$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds

Strange bedfellows

the named clusters of US funding

The camps

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

By state

where grant money is based, and what stays home

State money flows

the interactive map of money crossing state lines