· Private foundation
The Kelly and Sam Bronfman Family Foundation (Aka the Sam & Kelly Bronfma)
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: 66% of THE KELLY AND SAM BRONFMAN FAMILY FOUNDATION (AKA THE SAM & KELLY BRONFMA)’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 $10k1 grant · $14
- $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND SAMUEL BRONFMAN II DONOR ADVISED FUND | $1,000,000 |
| FROM PASS-THROUGH ENTITIES | $14 |
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 (FY20–22, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 25% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +23% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 27 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- TCTHE COLORADO COLLEGE3× · 2020–2022 · $488k · revenue +3%
- EVEAGLE VALLEY MENTAL HEALTH3× · 2020–2022 · $345k · revenue +23%
- TOTRUSTEES OF DEERFIELD ACADEMY3× · 2020–2022 · $120k · revenue +74%
Funded once
- SCSCHWAB CHARITABLE DONOR ADVISED FUNDone grant, 2022 · $273k
- VHVAIL HEALTH SERVICES FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $200k · revenue +97%
- ACACCELERATE CHANGE INCMINDone grant, 2022 · $55k
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.
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
Throughout its history, pomona college has educated men and women of exceptional promise. we gather individuals, regardless of financial circumstances, into a small residential community that is strongly rooted in southern california yet…
The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…
Maintain the swan valley's unique natural resources and ensure that a vibrant human community can sustain itself through stewardship, education, economic viability, and conservation on public and private lands.
Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…
Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…
Who we are - silicon valley education foundation (svef) focuses on raising student performance in the critical areas of math and science across all 33 santa clara county school districts, and also adjoining san mateo and alameda counties.…
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vail Health Services Foundation and the most unlike its peers is American Friends of the Canadian Centre for Architecture. 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 40 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
33 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. 33 of the 62 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 THE COLORADO COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds EAGLE VALLEY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds EAGLE VALLEY MENTAL HEALTH ↗
- Who funds VAIL HEALTH SERVICES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF DEERFIELD ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds SJOGREN'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Williams College ↗
- Who funds STANFORD HEALTH CARE ↗
- Who funds PUBLICOLOR INC ↗
- Who funds Betty Ford Alpine Gardens ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE CANADIAN CENTRE FOR ARCHITECTURE ↗
- Who funds Ten Strands ↗
- Who funds VAIL RELIGIOUS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Save The Bay ↗
- Who funds RACHEL'S NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds Environmental Volunteers Inc ↗
- Who funds GREENBELT ALLIANCEPEOPLE FOR OPEN SPACE ↗
- Who funds EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF EAGLE CNTY ↗
- Who funds Vail Symposium ↗
- Who funds Education Outside ↗
- Who funds SEMPERVIRENS FUND ↗
- Who funds THE PLUMPJACK FOUNDATION ↗
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: Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · The Winmax Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Oklahoma City Community Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Joyce & Paul Krasnow Charitable Foundation · Kelton Family Foundation · The Precourt Foundation · Frechette 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 Kelly and Sam Bronfman Family Foundation (Aka the Sam & Kelly Bronfma) 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Williams College — 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 Kelly and Sam Bronfman Family Foundation (Aka the Sam & Kelly Bronfma)?
Find your warmest path to The Kelly and Sam Bronfman Family Foundation (Aka the Sam & Kelly Bronfma) 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.