· Private foundation
The Christopher Catanese Childrens Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 45% of THE CHRISTOPHER CATANESE CHILDRENS FOUNDATION’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
- Under $10k17 grants · $47k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND | $25,000 |
| NE HEMOPHILIA ASSOCIATION | $25,000 |
| THE LEAGUE SCHOOL | $17,500 |
| BE LIKE BRIT | $12,000 |
| ST JOHN'S SEMINARY | $10,000 |
| CIRCLE OF HOPE | $10,000 |
| PAN MASS CHALLENGE | $8,212 |
| GOLF FIGHTS CANCER | $5,000 |
| MARY'S WISH FOR CHILDREN | $5,000 |
| MILLERTRACY CHILDREN'S F | $4,000 |
| GIVENGAIN FOUNDATION | $2,750 |
| A GIFT FROM AN ANGEL | $2,500 |
| CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
| COPS FOR KIDS WITH CANCER | $2,500 |
| THE HOME FOR LITTLE WANDERERS | $2,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $108k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 88% of those 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 +50% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
42 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2024, 21 since wound down; 2 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, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k 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
- COCIRCLE OF HOPE INC8× · 2017–2024 · $59k · revenue +181%
- PSPERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND2× · 2023–2024 · $50k · revenue +2%
- HOHOUSE OF POSSIBILITIES INC3× · 2017–2019 · $43k · revenue +506%
Funded once
- MMMAGICAL MOON FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +56%
- DODIOCESE OF OAKLAND ROMAN CATHOLICone grant, 2021 · $20k
- TRTHE ROBERT F TERRY JR FOUNDATIONone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue -22% · 54% of their budget
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.
Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service
Pediatric healthcare, education & research
The mission of children's cancer cause is to champion policies and programs that improve the lives of children with cancer and survivors.
To help kids and families heal the emotional scars of childhood cancer and learn to thrive.
Boston community pediatrics (bcp) provides ambulatory pediatric and related health care services to the residents of boston, massachusetts, and surrounding communities. bcp is a new model of innovative pediatric healthcare that addresses…
To help children and families transform significant emotional distress into increased resilience, hope and quality of life. to support the healing and learning process with innovation and integrity, and to serve as a model for best and…
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…
The wonderfund invests in children receiving services from dcf by providing enrichment opportunities and access to emergency aid and transitional necessities.the wonderfund is a private, nonprofit 501(c)3 that serves children engaged with…
Lifestream, inc. (the organization") provides community-based services that support individuals in attaining greater independence, promising opportunities, and lives that are meaningful and fulfilling on their own terms.
Massachusetts advocates for children, inc. ("mac") is a non-profit organization dedicated to removing barriers to educational and life opportunities for children and youth. we do so by advocating for and partnering with students and…
Beat childhood cancer drives childhood cancer research and raises awareness, making a difference in kids' survival today. our vision is to change the story for the next family by finding viable treatments and ultimately, cures for…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Massachusetts and Rhode Island Inc and the most unlike its peers is Eightfold Path. 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.
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 23 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
45 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. 45 of the 87 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 BE LIKE BRIT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CIRCLE OF HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds PERKINS SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND ↗
- Who funds HOUSE OF POSSIBILITIES INC ↗
- Who funds HOYT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND HEMOPHILIA ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds JOE ANDRUZZI FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MAGICAL MOON FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds HOME START INC ↗
- Who funds PAN-MASSACHUSETTS CHALLENGE INC ↗
- Who funds NASHOBA LEARNING GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds GOLF FIGHTS CANCER INC ↗
- Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
- Who funds THE ROBERT F TERRY JR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KING SOLOMON HUMANITARIAN FOUNDATION FOR HANDICAPPED CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds THE HOME FOR LITTLE WANDERERS INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THAI DAUGHTERS INC ↗
- Who funds ITALIAN HOME FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds Rodman For Kids Inc ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY CARE INC ↗
- Who funds COPS FOR KIDS WITH CANCER INC ↗
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: Eastern Bank Foundation · American Tower Corporation Foundation Inc · GivenGain Foundation USA · Amica Companies Foundation · Rockland Trust Charitable Foundation Inc · The Norwood Charitable Foundation Inc · The Bay State Federal Savings Charitable Foundation · Rockland Trust - Blue Hills Charitable Foundation · Cummings Foundation Grants Inc (Fka Oneworld Boston Inc) · Arbella Insurance Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · Lissy Family 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 organization The Christopher Catanese Childrens 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- House of Possibilities Inc — 76% of income from government
- Riverside Community Care Inc — 58% of income from government
- The Home for Little Wanderers Inc — 38% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Italian Home for Children Inc — 29% of income from government
- Nashoba Learning Group Inc — 14% of income from government
- Perkins School for the Blind — 7% of income from government
- Special Olympics Massachusetts Inc — 1% of income from government
- The Filmmakers Collaborative Inc — 1% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 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.