Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Essel 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.

$14M
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$400k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$60MEducation$5.3MInternational$469kSocial Science$360kReligion$200kYouth Development$200kPhilanthropy$100kRecreation & Sports$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $2,076,924, the rows itemized in this filing. The $13,748,538 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $11,671,614 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k10 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+2 grants · $800k
$180,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$270M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY$400,000
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY$400,000
THE LIEBER INSTITUTE FOR BRAIN DEVELOPMENT$186,074
THE LIEBER INSTITUTE FOR BRAIN DEVELOPMENT$186,074
POYNTER INSTITUTE$180,000
POYNTER INSTITUTE$180,000
THE CARTER CENTER INC$157,000
THE CARTER CENTER INC$157,000
BRAIN & BEHAVIOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION$65,388
BRAIN & BEHAVIOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION$65,388
SAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER$50,000
SAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER$50,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK: $15k → 20%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
NY
MA
CT
CA
NE
MD
GA
FL
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$50M · 8 repeat orgs$1.3M to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
13

Total granted

$50M
$877k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+39%

Still filing today

63%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $460k 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
EducationHealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesInternationalOther
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

  • TL
    THE LIEBER INSTITUTE INC
    5× · 2017–2024 · $35M · revenue +131% · 44% of their budget
  • NA
    NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION
    4× · 2017–2024 · $5.4M · revenue +60%
  • Williams College
    4× · 2018–2022 · $1.0M · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • NP
    NY PRESBYTERIAN
    one grant, 2017 · $200k
  • NF
    NYPH FUND INC
    one grant, 2018 · $200k
  • YA
    YOUTH ANXIETY CENTER NYP FUND INC
    one grant, 2020 · $200k
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
Institute for Advanced Study - Louis Bamberger & Mrs Felix Fuld Foundation

The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.

Science & Tech
2
New York University

Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.

Education
3
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
4
Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
5
Van Andel Research Institute

Medical research organization van andel research institute is an independent biomedical research organization committed to improving the health and enhancing the lives of current and future generations.

Health
6
Hugo W Moser Research Institute At Kennedy Krieger Inc

The hugo w. moser research institute at kennedy krieger, inc. (the "research institute") is an internationally recognized research facility finding answers to problems and injuries that affect a child's developing brain. researchers have…

Science & Tech
7
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
8
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
9
The Institute for Psychiatric Neuroscience

To carry out and support basic research related to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder OCD and Depression.

—
10
President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education
11
The Graduate School of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research

The graduate school of the stowers institute for medical research ("gssimr") exempt purpose is to provide graduate education that will prepare scholars for scientific research in the biological sciences.

Education
12
Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Lieber Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is Huntington's Disease Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 24 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE LIEBER INSTITUTE INC: $35,472,148 · HealthTHE LIEBER INSTITUTE INC+1 more: $1,500 · HealthNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION: $5,430,777 · OtherNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RES…BRIAN & BEHAVIOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $4,900,000 · OtherBRIAN & BEHAVIOR RESEARCH…Trustees Of Columbia University: $900,000 · OtherTrustees Of Columbia Univ…+11 more: $1,113,000 · Other+11 moreTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $3,280,500 · EducationTHE TRUST…Williams College: $1,000,000 · EducationWilliams …+2 more: $110,000 · EducationNARSAD RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $1,780,040 · PhilanthropyUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $100,000 · PhilanthropyTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $469,000 · InternationalHEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK: $15,000 · Human Services
Health$35,473,648Other$12,343,777Education$4,390,500Philanthropy$1,880,040International$469,000Human Services$15,000

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 budgetTHE LIEBER INSTITUTE INC: $35,472,148 over 5y, 44% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION: $5,430,777 over 4y, 12% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $3,280,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetNARSAD RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $1,780,040 over 2y, 32% of budgetWilliams College: $1,000,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $469,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetHEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetHUNTINGTON'S DISEASE FOUNDATION: $1,500 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.

  • Who funds THE LIEBER INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION ↗
  • Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
  • Who funds NARSAD RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds Williams College ↗
  • Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
  • Who funds SAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds HEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE FOUNDATION ↗

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA9.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Essel Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Essel Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 31%
  • The Lieber Institute Inc: 31% of income from government
  • Williams College: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get 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 Essel Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Essel 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 24 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 Essel’s filings →

More from the funding graph