· Private foundation
The Linda and Harvey Saligman Charitable Foundation
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 FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k13 grants · $37k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $65k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $265k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY | $150,000 |
| THE LINDA & HARVEY SALIGMAN FOUNDATION DONOR ADVISED FUND | $115,000 |
| NANTUCKET HISTORICAL ASSOCATION | $14,310 |
| METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART | $11,000 |
| DONALD DANFORTH PLANT SCIENCE CENTER | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL SPEECH & DEBATE ASSOCIATION | $10,000 |
| BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF LOS ANGELES | $10,000 |
| LITTLE FOLKS SCHOOL | $10,000 |
| NANTUCKET COLLEGE HOSPITAL | $9,450 |
| IN TOWN PLAY GROUP | $5,000 |
| NANTUCKET ATHENEUM | $5,000 |
| UNITED WAY OF GREATER ST LOUIS | $2,600 |
| ARTISTS ASSOCIATION OF NANTUCKET | $2,500 |
| MARIA MITCHELL ASSOCIATION | $2,250 |
| JOHN BURROUGHS SCHOOL | $1,923 |
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 (FY19–23, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% 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 +18% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.
38 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 1 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; $10k 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
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY7× · 2019–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +44%- MMMETROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART7× · 2019–2025 · $76k · revenue +76%
- NHNANTUCKET HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION7× · 2019–2025 · $59k · revenue +76%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2024 · $9k
THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue -14%- PAPENNSYLVANIA ACADEMY OF THE FINE ARTSone grant, 2022 · $2k · revenue -15%
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.
The mission of the national academy of design is to promote the fine arts in america through exhibition and education.
The nantucket conservation foundation owns, protects, and stewards over 9,000 acres of land and coastal shoreline, conserves nantucket's rare and significant natural resources, and engages in impactful ecological research to inform…
The Museum's mission is to encourage and promote the appreciation of fine art to people in its surrounding communities and beyond. The Museum is dedicated to fostering a deeper understanding of the arts, with particular emphasis on the…
The mission of the new orleans museum of art is to inspire the love of art; to collect, preserve, exhibit and present excellence in the visual arts; to educate, challenge and engage a diverse public.
New england museum association's mission is to connect a community engaged in learning, collaboration, and action to cultivate a better museum world.
To collect, display and interpret objects in craft art and design.
To acquire, preserve and interpret artifacts of nahant, massachusetts, illustrating its history, prehistory and that of people associated with it, for the enjoyment, education and enrichment of the public.
The Museum of Modern Art is a private, non-profit institution chartered by the State of New York Department of Education in 1929 to foster public awareness of modern and contemporary art. (Continued in Schedule O)
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
To foster an appreciation of the quality and diversity of life on cape ann, past and present; to further the knowledge and enjoyment of cape ann history and art; to collect and preserve significant information and artifacts; and to…
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nantucket Historical Association and the most unlike its peers is The Albert F Egan Jr & Dorothy H Egan F. 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 52 years old; the field is 24. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
34 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. 34 of the 52 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 WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FORENSIC LEAGUE D/B/A NATIONAL SPEECH AND DEBATE ASSOC ↗
- Who funds The Society of the Four Arts Inc ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF VENICE ↗
- Who funds DONALD DANFORTH PLANT SCIENCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF GREATER ST LOUIS INC ↗
- Who funds INTOWN PLAYGROUP INC ↗
- Who funds ARTISTS ASSOCIATION OF NANTUCKET INC ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET ATHENEUM INC ↗
- Who funds LITTLE FOLKS SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JOHN BURROUGHS SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds THE FRIENDS OF THE NANTUCKET HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds ST LOUIS ART MUSEUM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NORTON MUSEUM OF ART INC ↗
- Who funds MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET PRESERVATION TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET LIGHTSHIP BASKET MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET MARIA MITCHELL ASSOCIATION IN ↗
- Who funds SMALL FRIENDS ON NANTUCKET INC ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE ALBERT F EGAN JR & DOROTHY H EGAN F ↗
- Who funds PENNSYLVANIA ACADEMY OF THE FINE ARTS ↗
- Who funds THE SAINT LOUIS ZOO ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NANTUCKET ARTS COUNCIL 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: Community Foundation for Nantucket Inc · Ernst & Elfriede Frank Foundation Inc · Clara Foundation Inc · Nantucket Golf Club Foundation Inc · The Hale Family Foundation · Charina Foundation Inc Richard Menschel · Elizabeth Thayer & E Geoffrey Verney Foundation · The George & Marie Chabot Charitable Foundation · Gilbert Verney Foundation · Carverdelaney Families Foundation Inc · Cape Cod Five Cents Savings Bank Charitable Foundation Trust · Boston Foundation Inc
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 Linda and Harvey Saligman Charitable 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.
- Nantucket Maria Mitchell Association in — 9% of income from government
- Nantucket Historical Association — 1% of income from government
- Artists Association of Nantucket 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 Linda and Harvey Saligman Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Linda and Harvey Saligman Charitable 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.