· Private foundation
The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 48% of THE CAMILLE AND HENRY DREYFUS FOUNDATION INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k12 grants · $267k
- $50k–250k29 grants · $2.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA | $100,000 |
| CORNELL UNIVERSITY | $100,000 |
| REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA | $100,000 |
| CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY | $100,000 |
| JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON | $100,000 |
| PRINCETON UNIVERSITY | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF AKRON | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL | $100,000 |
| THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO BOULDER | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN | $100,000 |
| REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA | $100,000 |
| STANFORD UNIVERSITY | $100,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 76% of your 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 +26% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
43 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2024, 23 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.2M 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
University of Chicago5× · 2020–2024 · $770k · revenue +52%- CICALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY5× · 2020–2024 · $700k · revenue +18%
Cornell University4× · 2021–2024 · $498k · revenue +23%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $250k
TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITYone grant, 2021 · $128k · revenue +24%
Trustees of Tufts Collegegraduatedone grant, 2020 · $120k · revenue +39%
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.
Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…
Endicott college offers students a vibrant academic environment that remains true to its founding principle of integrating professional and liberal arts with experiential learning. for more information see schedule o.
See Form 990, Part I, Line 1, Description of Organization Mission.
Dickinson college provides a useful, innovative and interdisciplinary education in the liberal arts and sciences to prepare students to lead rich and fulfilling lives of engaged global citizenship
As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.
Fairleigh dickinson university is a center of academic excellence dedicated to the preparation of world citizens through global education. the university strives to provide students with the multi-disciplinary, intercultural, and ethical…
Hillsdale college is a private liberal arts college with approximately 1,500 students. founded in 1844, the college remains, in the words of its articles of association, "grateful to god for the inestimable blessings resulting from the…
To educate students in the liberal arts through free inquiry and the open exchange of ideas.when grinnell college framed its charter in the iowa territory of the united states in 1846, it set forth a mission to educate its students "for…
As the national university of the catholic church in the united states, founded and sponsored by the bishops of the country with the approval of the holy see, the catholic university of america is committed to being a comprehensive…
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fordham University and the most unlike its peers is Twin Cities Regional Science Fairs. 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 80 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) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
66 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. 66 of the 134 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 Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds University of Chicago ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Northwestern University ↗
- Who funds JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Dartmouth College ↗
- Who funds BROWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds LAFAYETTE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Creighton University ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds LEHIGH UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY ↗
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: National Collegiate Athletic Association · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 26% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 12% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 11% of income from government
- Johns Hopkins University — 11% of income from government
- Brandeis University — 8% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 5% of income from government
- Willamette University — 4% of income from government
- Northeastern University — 4% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 2% of income from government
- Lewis & Clark College — 2% of income from government
- Fairfield University — 1% of income from government
- The Trustees of Mount Holyoke College — 0% of income from government
- Reed Institute — 0% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation Inc 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.