Skip to content
The Charles and Cerise Jacobs Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Charles and Cerise Jacobs Charitable 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.

$65k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$65k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$649kEducation$301kHealth$6kFood & Nutrition$4kHuman Services$681Community Improvement$676Civil Rights$250Philanthropy$100Other$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$65,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WHITE SNAKE PROJECTS INC$65,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 37% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%PAN MASS CHALLENGE: $1k → 7%BOSTON EARLY MUSIC FESTIVAL: $1k → 8%CALLIOPE PRODUCTIONS INC: $500 → 11%BOSTON SYMPHONY: $4k → 16%HANDS ACCROSS THE WORLD: $681 → 11%OPERA AMERICA: $400 → 17%NETWORK FOR GOOD: $50 → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: $200k → 14%PAN MASS CHALLENGE: $511 → 7%BOSTON COLLEGIATE FOUNDATION: $500 → 16%NATIONAL COUNCIL AUDITIONS: $500 → 17%NETWORK FOR GOOD: $50 → 14%UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: $100k → 14%PAN MASS CHALLENGE: $511 → 7%CELEBRITY SERIES OF BOSTON: $25k → 16%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $1k → 17%BROOKLINE FOOD PANTRY: $1k → 7%CELEBRITY SERIES OF BOSTON: $6k → 16%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $1k → 17%BROOKLINE FOOD PANTRY: $1k → 7%MIRA COALITION: $250 → 16%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $1k → 17%BROOKLINE FOOD PANTRY: $1k → 7%NEW GALLERY CONCERT SERIES: $250 → 16%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $1k → 17%BROOKLINE FOOD PANTRY: $1k → 7%BOSTON LYRIC OPERA: $1k → 16%MISCELLANEOUS: $500 → 7%BOSTON LYRIC OPERA: $1k → 16%MISCELLANEOUS: $500 → 7%BOSTON BAROQUE: $4k → 16%WHITE SNAKE PROJECTS INC: $385k → 7%BOSTON BAROQUE: $4k → 16%WHITE SNAKE PROJECTS INC: $153k → 7%BOSTON BAROQUE: $3k → 16%WHITE SNAKE PROJECTS INC: $65k → 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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$957k · 9 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +49% since the first grant, against +47% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
11

Total granted

$957k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+47%

Still filing today

78%
45%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25
Arts & CultureEducationFood & NutritionCivil RightsOther
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

  • University of Chicago
    2× · 2017–2018 · $300k · revenue +56%
  • BB
    BOSTON BAROQUE INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $10k · revenue +25%
  • BF
    BROOKLINE FOOD PANTRY INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $4k · revenue +373%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $4k
  • BE
    BOSTON EARLY MUSIC FESTIVAL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +53%
  • HA
    HANDS ACROSS THE WORLD
    one grant, 2019 · $681 · revenue -44%
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
Boston Opera Collaborative

Stage live opera performances.

Arts & Culture
2
Boston Modern Orchestra Project Inc

To build a structurally sound and musically vital ensemble which seeks to explore and present music of the 20th century. all schools, movements and styles from the turn of the century to the present day will be offered. it is the practical…

Arts & Culture
3
Boston Philharmonic Orchestra Corporation

The BPO was formed in 1979 to provide opportunities for an evolving community of amateur student and professional players to perform together present challenging classical repertoire & enhance the publics awareness & understanding of this…

Arts & Culture
4
Boston Musica Viva Inc

To broaden experience, knowledge and enjoyment of every style of new music by embracing the full range of today's compositional activity and giving voice to music that might otherwise not be heard.

—
5
Pro Arte Chamber Orchestra of Boston Inc

Musician-led cooperative chamber orchestra which performs familiar and adventurous music in concert halls and community settings.

—
6
Florentine Opera Company Inc

The florentine opera company is driven to produce the full range of operatic works reflecting the highest musical and theatrical standards, and to support community and education programs that foster the current and next generation of…

Arts & Culture
7
Los Angeles Opera Company

To serve the public by producing world-class opera that preserves, promotes and advances the art form while embodying the diversity, spirit and artistic sensibility unique to los angeles. we envision an engaged and enlightened community in…

Arts & Culture
8
Cantata Singers Inc

Cantata singers illuminates our shared humanity through choral music.

Arts & Culture
9
Foundation for Modern Opera
—
10
Emmanuel Music Inc

Emmanuel music engages with audiences and musicians to explore the enduring questions of our shared human experience, building on our core commitment to the music of j.s. bach. expanding on a 55-year plus tradition of weekly bach cantatas…

—
11
Concerto Soloists Chamber Orchestra of Philadelphia

To be a sustainable musical institution that brings the intimate experience of a world-class chamber orchestra performance to the greater philadelphia area,enriching the musical life of the city and region by the integrity and excellence…

Arts & Culture
12
Chamber Opera of Chicago
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Celebrity Series of Boston Inc; the most unlike its peers is New Gallery Concert Series 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

14 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. 14 of the 21 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WHITE SNAKE PROJECTS INC: $602,750 · Arts & CultureWHITE SNAKE PROJECTS INC+6 more: $14,150 · Arts & CultureUniversity of Chicago: $300,000 · EducationUniversity of Chicago+1 more: $681 · EducationTHE CELEBRITY SERIES OF BOSTON INC: $31,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $4,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $4,000 · OtherPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $2,022 · Other+5 more: $3,176 · OtherBROOKLINE FOOD PANTRY INC: $4,000 · Food & NutritionMASSACHUSETTS IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE ADVOCACY COALITION INC: $250 · Civil RightsNETWORK FOR GOOD: $100 · Public Safety & Disaster
Arts & Culture$616,900Education$300,681Other$44,198Food & Nutrition$4,000Civil Rights$250Public Safety & Disaster$100

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 budgetWHITE SNAKE PROJECTS INC: $602,750 over 3y, 16% of budgetUniversity of Chicago: $300,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CELEBRITY SERIES OF BOSTON INC: $31,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetBOSTON BAROQUE INC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetBROOKLINE FOOD PANTRY INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetPAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC: $2,022 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBOSTON LYRIC OPERA COMPANY: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBOSTON EARLY MUSIC FESTIVAL INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHANDS ACROSS THE WORLD: $681 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCALLIOPE PRODUCTIONS INCORPORATED: $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOPERA AMERICA INC: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS IMMIGRANT AND REFUGEE ADVOCACY COALITION INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD: $100 over 2y, 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Boston Foundation IncWender FoundationThe Hamilton Company …The Aaron Copland Fun…Combined Jewish Phila…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…The Pfizer Foundation…Gs Donor Advised Phil…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…
Boston Foundation IncMA18.4× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boston Foundation Inc · Wender Foundation · The Hamilton Company Charitable Foundation · The Aaron Copland Fund for Music Inc Co Alter Kendrick & Baron LLP · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation

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 The Charles and Cerise Jacobs Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Charles and Cerise Jacobs Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition Inc: 8% of income from government
  • White Snake Projects Inc: 8% of income from government
  • The Celebrity Series of Boston Inc: 3% of income from government
  • Boston Lyric Opera Company: 3% of income from government
  • Boston Baroque Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc: 0% of 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 · 0–50%
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 The Charles and Cerise Jacobs Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Charles and Cerise Jacobs Charitable 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 21 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 Charles and Cerise Jacobs’ 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