Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Clyfford Foundation Inc

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.

$288k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$260k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$384kAnimals$71kInternational$45kArts & Culture$19kFood & Nutrition$5kEducation$4kPhilanthropy$3kHealth$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $3k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
  • $250k+1 grant · $260k
$15,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$527k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CLIMATE LAW POLICY PROJECT$260,200
GIMME SHELTER ANIMAL RESCUE$15,000
CHARITY AID FOUNDATION AMERICA$10,000
BARD COLLEGE$2,500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%BETHESDA CARES: $1k → 8%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$471k · 7 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +149% since the first grant, against +40% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
12

Total granted

$471k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+149%
+40%

Still filing today

86%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Food & NutritionPhilanthropyEducationAnimalsScience & TechArts & CultureOther
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

  • TA
    The Abraham Foundation
    4× · 2017–2020 · $23k · revenue +149%
  • 1A
    1761 ARTS INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $11k · revenue +167%
  • BARD COLLEGE
    2× · 2017–2024 · $3k · revenue +256%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • AI
    AKASHINGA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue +290%
  • MF
    MANNA FOOD CENTER INC
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · 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
New York Sustainable Agriculture Working Group

New York Sustainable Agricultural Working Group (NYSAWG) is a not-for-profit organization located in western New York to raise awareness of issues affecting the sustainability of the food and agriculture system. The Organizations mission…

Food & Nutrition
2
Food Bank Association of New York State

The mission of feeding new york state is to lead a unified effort for a hunger-free state of new york. the mission of food banking is to obtain food and deliver it to emergency food programs. feeding new york state works to end hunger by…

Food & Nutrition
3
Greater Boston Food Bank Inc

Our costs consist of acquiring, sorting and distributing food to 617 member agencies, transportation and logistics, and community outreach to 69 direct distribution sites such as gbfb mobile markets, and federal distributions for low…

—
4
Mountain Top Arboretum Inc

Conserve, enhance, and celebrate our distinctive catskill sanctuary through sustainable horticulture, responsible land stewardship, and innovative educational programming

—
5
Connecticut Foodshare Inc

The mission of the connecticut foodshare is to deliver an informed and equitable response to hunger by mobilizing community partners, volunteers, and supporters.

—
6
Pitney Meadows Community Farm Inc

Pitney meadows community farm's mission is to celebrate and explore agricultural educaiton, healthy food and recreation.

Food & Nutrition
7
Cannon Point Preservation Corp

The purpose is to ensure, improve and maintain the integrity of the community surrounding sutton place south and sutton place park in manhattan, new york (the "community"), including the visual aspects, aesthetics, trees, shrubs and…

—
8
Island Harvest Ltd

The mission of island harvest is to end hunger and reduce food waste on long island.

Human Services
9
Manna Food Bank Inc

To offer emergency food assistance, service the food-related needs of vulnerable populations, and engage the entire community in the fight against hunger. we are nonsectarian, community focused, and volunteer supported.

Food & Nutrition
10
Zero Foodprint

Zero foodprint is mobilizing the food world around agricultural climate solutions. our work aims to create a circular economy that incentivizes practices that actively draw down carbon dioxide and offer our best hope of addressing the…

Food & Nutrition
11
Merrimack Valley Food Bank Inc

The focus of the merrimack valley food bank is to help meet a person's most profound need - adequate nutrition and freedom from hunger. only through cooperative efforts can society initiate change, develop strategies to alleviate hunger,…

Food & Nutrition
12
Protect the Adirondacks Inc

Protect is a grassroots, membership organization dedicated to the protection, stewardship and sustainability of the natural environment and human communities of the adirondack park and the new york state forest preserve for current and…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Star Fund Inc; the most unlike its peers is Bard College. 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

15 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. 15 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CLIMATE LAW AND POLICY PROJECT INC: $381,700 · Science & TechCLIMATE LAW AND POLICY PROJECT INCCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $45,000 · PhilanthropyCHARITIES AID …The Abraham Foundation: $22,500 · PhilanthropyThe Abraham Fo…+1 more: $1,500 · PhilanthropyGimme Shelter Animal Rescue Inc: $45,950 · AnimalsGimme Shel…AKASHINGA INC: $2,500 · Animals1761 ARTS INC (FKA THE MILL INC): $6,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherNORTH STAR FUND INC: $1,750 · OtherAVALON THEATER: $1,500 · OtherGET US PPE INC: $1,500 · OtherBARD COLLEGE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: $1,000 · OtherBETHESDA CARES INC: $1,000 · OtherMADOO CONSERVANCY INC: $1,000 · Other+1 more: $500 · Other1761 ARTS INC: $11,000 · Arts & CultureMANNA FOOD CENTER INC: $2,500 · Food & NutritionMONTAUK FOOD PANTRY: $1,000 · Food & NutritionSPRINGS FOOD PANTRY INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionBARD COLLEGE: $3,250 · EducationSYRACUSE UNIVERSITY: $1,000 · Education
Science & Tech$381,700Philanthropy$69,000Animals$48,450Other$19,250Arts & Culture$11,000Food & Nutrition$4,500Education$4,250

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 budgetCLIMATE LAW AND POLICY PROJECT INC: $381,700 over 8y, 98% of budgetGimme Shelter Animal Rescue Inc: $45,950 over 5y, 6.7% of budgetCHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA: $45,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetThe Abraham Foundation: $22,500 over 4y, 1.4% of budget1761 ARTS INC: $11,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetBARD COLLEGE: $3,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAKASHINGA INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMANNA FOOD CENTER INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTH STAR FUND INC: $1,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MONTAUK PLAYHOUSE COMMUNITY CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMONTAUK FOOD PANTRY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBETHESDA CARES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSYRACUSE UNIVERSITY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPRINGS FOOD PANTRY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift FundNY14.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Clyfford Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Clyfford Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • Bethesda Cares Inc: 100% of income from government
  • Manna Food Center Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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 Clyfford Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Clyfford 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.

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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Clyfford’s filings →

More from the funding graph