· Private foundation
The John a & Elizabeth F Taylor Charitable Foundation Inc
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k7 grants · $52k
- $10k–50k12 grants · $367k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $361k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CONSERVATION FLORIDA INC | $168,750 |
| PALM BEACH COUNTY FISHING FOUNDATION INC | $125,000 |
| CAPTAINS FOR CLEAN WATER INC | $67,097 |
| LOGGERHEAD MARINE LIFE CENTER INC | $49,875 |
| SURFRIDER FOUNDATION | $47,097 |
| BILLFISH FOUNDATION INC | $41,000 |
| I CARE CORPORATION | $35,750 |
| UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA FOUNDATION | $34,099 |
| BILLION OYSTER PROJECT INC | $33,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S FISHING ASSOCIATION SCHOLARSHIP TRUST | $29,875 |
| FLORIDA AQUARIUM INC | $25,000 |
| WILD OCEANS INC | $22,097 |
| GUY HARVEY OCEAN FUND INC | $20,000 |
| DUKE UNIVERSITY MARINE LAB | $19,097 |
| CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC | $10,000 |
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 (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 83% 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.
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 +21% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- PBPALM BEACH COUNTY FISHING FOUNDATION INC6× · 2020–2025 · $798k · revenue +51% · 26% of their budget
- CFCONSERVATION FLORIDA INC6× · 2020–2025 · $407k · revenue ×23
- LMLOGGERHEAD MARINELIFE CENTER INC6× · 2020–2025 · $398k · revenue +8%
Funded once
- TNTHE NATURE CONSERVATORYone grant, 2023 · $73k
- SFSeaLegacy Foundation Incone grant, 2023 · $28k · revenue -46%
- FRFLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INCone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -12%
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.
Protecting and promoting the marine biodiversity of Hawai'i through coral restoration, ecological monitoring, regenerative tourism, and cultural integration
The mission of wildcoast is to conserve coastal and marine ecosystems and address climate change through natural solutions. our staff is dedicated to conserving threatened and endangered coastlines and wildlife in california and mexico.…
Save threatened marine life using pioneering research, education, and sustainable conservation solutions
The mission of the marine resources council (mrc) is to maintain and enhance the quality of marine systems for the economic, recreational, aesthetic, and environmental use for the people of florida
The mission of Ocean First Institute is ocean conservation through research and education. We work to deepen the natural connection between people and the ocean. We educate and empower people to understand the ocean is our life support…
Our research has demonstrated that corals can adapt to the effects of environmental stressors if immediate threats are reduced and if we protect healthy, ecologically connected networks of reefs.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
Leading Citizen scientists to promote stewardship of sustainable reef communities worldwide.
To scale coral reef restoration through a holistic model of art, science and community. we design marine regeneration hubs that consist of sculptural coral gardens and land-based coral farms. we aim to target local impacts on reefs while…
To safeguard Florida's water, wildlife, and wild spaces by taking action today to prevent irreversible loss tomorrow.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Captains for Clean Water Inc and the most unlike its peers is Baltimore Museum of Art. 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 26 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 27% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 17% 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.
39 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. 39 of the 43 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 PALM BEACH COUNTY FISHING FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds LOGGERHEAD MARINELIFE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BILLION OYSTER PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CAPTAINS FOR CLEAN WATER INC ↗
- Who funds THE BILLFISH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WILD OCEANS INC ↗
- Who funds 1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds The Florida Aquarium Inc ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S FISHING ASSOC SCHOLARSHIP FUND C/O JOAN VERNON ↗
- Who funds KIBBLEZ OF LOVE INC ↗
- Who funds ICARE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds GUMBO LIMBO COASTAL STEWARDS INC ↗
- Who funds The Ocean Foundation ↗
- Who funds Ocean Rescue Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER COALITION OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY ↗
- Who funds GUY HARVEY OCEAN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds SeaLegacy Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds VOTO LATINO FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA RISING TOGETHER INC ↗
- Who funds WHEN WE ALL VOTE ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EVERGLADES INC ↗
- Who funds CITIZENS FOR A BETTER SOUTH FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Civic Nation ↗
- Who funds SEASHARE ↗
- Who funds FISH & WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA I ↗
- Who funds SHARK ALLIES ↗
- Who funds ORCA CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds 4OCEAN CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MILLBROOK SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds BIG DOG RANCH RESCUE 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: The Batchelor Foundation Inc · Community Foundation for Palm Beach and Martin Counties Inc · Verizon Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving 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 John a & Elizabeth F Taylor Charitable 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.
- The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc — 16% of income from government
- Baltimore Museum of Art — 4% of income from government
- Fish & Wildlife Foundation of Florida I — 1% of income from government
- Big Dog Ranch Rescue Inc — 0% of income from government
- Guy Harvey Ocean Fund Inc — 0% of income from government
- The Florida Aquarium 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The John a & Elizabeth F Taylor Charitable Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The John a & Elizabeth F Taylor Charitable 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.