How much did Sherman and Linda Saperstein grant in FY2025?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 66% of Sherman and Linda Saperstein’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

2020

artculturalreliefresearchmedicalhungerfood bank

2021

reliefresearchconservationmedicalfood bank

2022

congregationbeth israelprotectionrelieffood bank

2023

reliefmedical care

2024

—

2025

hunger preventionhumanitarianmedical

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

03FY2025 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k24 grants · $24k
$10k–50k3 grants · $45k

$500

Median grant

States reached

$60k

Total assets

Largest grants

Arizona Jewish Historical Society$25,000
Hyde Square Task Force$10,000
First Place Phoenix$10,000
Mama Hill's Help$5,000
Arizona Musicfest$5,000
Sagewood Residents' Foundation$3,000
Jewish Family Children's Service$2,500
Friends of AZ PBS$1,500
NYU Langone Health$1,000
CJP of Greater Phoenix$1,000
Honor Health Foundation$1,000
Jewish Free Loan$1,000
HHRC of Maine$500
GBH$500
Act One$250

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 11%. 99% of your 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.

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.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$210k · 41 repeat orgs$61k to everyone else

41 repeat relationships — 23 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$210k

$34k

Still filing today

46%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Arts & CultureInternationalFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementHealthCivil RightsOther

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

Hyde Square Task Force
6× · 2020–2025 · $60k · revenue +31%
AM
Arizona Musicfest
4× · 2022–2025 · $12k · revenue +225%
SR
Sagewood Residents' Foundation
2× · 2024–2025 · $6k · revenue +231%

Funded once

BI
Beth Israel Congregation
one grant, 2022 · $25k
TB
Temple Beth Israel
one grant, 2020 · $5k
JC
Jewish Community Federation
one grant, 2023 · $2k

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.

Tucson Museum of Art

The tucson museum of art and historic block connects art to life through meaningful, engaging experiences that inspire discovery, spark creativity, and promote cultural understanding.

Arts & Culture

Southern Arizona Arts & Cultural Alliance

A non-profit organization dedicated to the preservation, expansion and creation of Arts and Culture in Southern Arizona.

Philanthropy

The Frick Collection

The Frick Collection (the "Collection") operates an internationally recognized art museum and library program for the inspiration and enjoyment of the public and for the advancement of the study of fine arts and kindred subjects.

—

National Gallery of Art

The National Gallery of Art serves the nation by welcoming all people to explore and experience art, creativity, and our shared humanity.

Arts & Culture

American Friends of Israel Philharmonic Orchestra

To raise funds to support the operations and secure the israel philharmonic's financial future.

Arts & Culture

Arizona Latin-American

Unclassified

International Contemporary Art

Arts & Culture

The Art Institute of Chicago

The Art Institute of Chicago, a not-for-profit corporation, is both a museum and an institution of higher education that exists to provide appreciation and education in visual fine arts and design.

Education

Arizona Theatre Company

ATC's mission is to create world-class theatre about what it means to be alive today - inspiring curiosity and creativity, sparking empathy and joy - bringing all Arizonans together.

Arts & Culture

Arizona Center for Nature Conservation

The arizona center for nature conservation (acnc) advances the stewardship and conservation of animals and their habitats while providing experiences that inspire people and motivate them to care for the natural world.

Animals

San Francisco Museum of Modern Art

Inspire diverse audiences through exhibitions, education, publications & collections.

Arts & Culture

Segerstrom Center for the Arts

Developing and operating a major performing arts center presenting the finest in performing arts.

Arts & Culture

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Scottsdale Arts and the most unlike its peers is The Phoenix Theatre. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 40 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 28% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/23

the rest of the field

13%

3,773/28,462

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.

05the grantee network

20 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)

Early backer (in before they grew)

20/20

Grantees still filing

15/20

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$179,750Community Improvement$60,000Arts & Culture$21,150Education$5,500International$2,750Food & Nutrition$1,225Civil Rights$450Health$375

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.

Arizona Community FoundationAZ21× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Virginia G Piper Charitable Trust · Thunderbirds Charities · Jewish Community Foundation Of · The Herberger Foundation · Flinn Foundation · The Diane and Bruce Halle Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · 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 organisation Sherman and Linda Saperstein 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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: Sagewood Residents' Foundation.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~11 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 3.3× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 462328702 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 Sagewood Residents' Foundation, 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

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 11 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 1% 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 Sherman and Linda Saperstein?

Find your warmest path to Sherman and Linda Saperstein 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.

Sherman and Linda Saperstein

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

20 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Sherman and Linda Saperstein?

More from the funding graph

Sherman and Linda Saperstein

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

20 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Sherman and Linda Saperstein?

More from the funding graph