Skip to content
Sorensen Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Sorensen 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.

$25k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Education$60kReligion$60kArts & Culture$55kPhilanthropy$20kHealth$10kRecreation & Sports$10kYouth Development$10k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$20,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$714k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOCA CT INC$20,000
YOU GOT THIS KID LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION$5,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 43% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%JEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTER MAKOR INC: $20k → 7%CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $5k → 17%NATIONAL PEDIATRIC CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $5k → 13%MOCA CT INC: $20k → 9%HOLE IN THE WALL GANG FUND INC: $10k → 12%YOU GOT THIS KID LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION: $5k → 10%DONORS TRUST INC: $20k → 9%SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY: $20k → 16%JEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTER MAKOR INC: $20k → 7%MOCA CT INC: $20k → 9%YOU GOT THIS KID LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION: $5k → 10%SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY: $20k → 16%JEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTER MAKOR INC: $10k → 7%SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY: $20k → 16%JEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTER MAKOR INC: $10k → 7%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$170k · 4 repeat orgs$35k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$170k
$35k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3%
+21%

Still filing today

75%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’19’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHealthEducationReligionRecreation & SportsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2021–2023 · $60k · revenue +18%
  • JE
    JEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTERMAKOR INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $60k · revenue -75%
  • MC
    MOCA CT INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $40k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • TW
    The Wisconsin Philharmonic Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +16%
  • HI
    HOLE IN THE WALL GANG FUND INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +72%
  • NATIONAL PEDIATRIC CANCER FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue +21%
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Curesearch for Children's Cancer

Curesearch's mission is to fund & support targeted & innovative cancer research with measurable results, & to be the authoritative source of information & resources for all those affected by children's cancer. see schedule o for…

Health
2
Cancer Research and Biostatistics

To help conquer cancer and other diseases through the application of biostatistical principles and innovative data management methods.

Health
3
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
4
Connecticut Cancer Foundation Inc

To provide funds to benefit families affected by cancer and to support cancer research and education.

—
5
Pediatric Cancer Research Foundation

Fund research to power cures that reduce the percentage of children who perish from cancer until that number reaches zero.

—
6
Israel Cancer Research Fund Inc

To support cancer research in israel, for the benefit of israel and all mankind.

—
7
The Mark Foundation for Cancer Research (Us) Ltd

Partner with scientists to accelerate research that will transform the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer through ground breaking science carried out by individual investigators, multidisciplinary teams, and early stage…

Health
8
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
9
The Institute for Cancer Research

To prevail over cancer, marshaling heart and mind in bold scientific discovery, pioneering prevention and compassionate care.

Health
10
Iit Research Institute

Perform basic research and preclinical efficacy assessments of new molecular entities being developed for the prevention and treatment of cancer and infectious disease. Discover new pathways and targets for the design and development of…

Science & Tech
11
Children's Tumor Foundation

Our mission: drive research, expand knowledge, and advance care for the nf community. our vision: end nf.

Health
12
Pediatric Cancer Foundation

Pediatric cancer foundation is a nonprofit charitable organization that raises funds for groundbreaking research and early phase clinical trials to eradicate childhood cancer. these trials are conducted by world renowned doctors at the…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hole in the Wall Gang Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Jewish Educational and Cultural Centermakor Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 9 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY: $60,000 · EducationSHENANDOAH UNIVERSITYJEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTERMAKOR INC: $60,000 · ReligionJEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURA…MOCA CT INC: $40,000 · Arts & CultureMOCA CT INCThe Wisconsin Philharmonic Inc: $15,000 · Arts & CultureThe Wisconsin Philharmonic …Donors Trust Inc: $20,000 · PhilanthropyDonors Tru…YOU GOT THIS KID LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherHOLE IN THE WALL GANG FUND INC: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsNATIONAL PEDIATRIC CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · HealthCANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 · Health
Education$60,000Religion$60,000Arts & Culture$55,000Philanthropy$20,000Other$10,000Recreation & Sports$10,000Health$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSHENANDOAH UNIVERSITY: $60,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL CENTERMAKOR INC: $60,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetMOCA CT INC: $40,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetDonors Trust Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOLE IN THE WALL GANG FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL PEDIATRIC CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Fidelity Investments …
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Sorensen Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sorensen Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Sorensen Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Sorensen Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 9 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Sorensen Family’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