· Private foundation
The Louis Messer and Helen Messer Charitable Foundation C/O M Glasser
Its FY2023 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: 44% of THE LOUIS MESSER AND HELEN MESSER CHARITABLE FOUNDATION C/O M GLASSER’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 · FY2023
- Under $10k12 grants · $52k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HADASSAH FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $10,000 |
| FISHER HOUSE FOUNDATION | $7,000 |
| AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION | $7,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $7,000 |
| SHRINERS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN | $6,000 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| PARKINSON'S FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| UNICEF | $4,000 |
| NAT'L IMMIGRATION LAW CTR | $4,000 |
| AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION | $3,000 |
| CLARK UNIVERSITY | $2,000 |
| ASPCA | $2,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–21, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 57% of those 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.
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 +46% since the first grant, against +36% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2023, 20 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 63% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k 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
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC4× · 2017–2023 · $36k · revenue +98%- AHAmerican Heart Association Inc4× · 2017–2023 · $36k · revenue +33%
SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN4× · 2017–2021 · $29k · revenue +120%
Funded once
- KKKENNEDY KREIGEN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $6k
- JBJEWISH BOARD OF FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES INCone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +5%
- NANATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE MENTALLY ILLone grant, 2017 · $5k
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.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
Aamc leads & serves the academic medicine community to improve the health of people everywhere.
The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.
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.
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.
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
American psychological association is a national membership organization created to promote the advancement, communication, and application of psychological science and knowledge to benefit society and improve lives. apa fulfills these…
Brightfocus foundation funds exceptional research worldwide to defeat alzheimer's disease, macular degeneration, and glaucoma and provides expert information on these heartbreaking diseases. please refer to schedule o for a complete…
The american psychiatric association (apa) was incorporated in 2000 as a 501(c)(6) trade association. its 38,000 u.s. and international physician members specialize in the diagnosis and treatment of mental health and disorders, including…
The mission of the american college of physicians (acp), www. acponline.org, is to enhance the quality and effectiveness of health care by fostering excellence and professionalism in the practice of medicine. acp was founded in 1915 to…
A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.
AJC's mission is to enhance the wellbeing of the Jewish people and Israel, and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United States and around the world. In pursuit of this mission, AJC advances democratic principles, fights…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Council of Jewish Women Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. 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 48 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 44 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 MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds HIAS INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds JEWISH SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds FISHER HOUSE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SHELTERING ARMS CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF CLARK UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds UERMMMC ALUMNI FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds AUTISM SPEAKS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH BOARD OF FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN MACULAR DEGENERATION GOEHRING ↗
- Who funds DOROT INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION 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: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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 Louis Messer and Helen Messer Charitable Foundation C/O M Glasser 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.
- Hias Inc — 88% of income from government
- Trustees of Clark University — 2% of income from government
- Jewish Social Service Agency — 1% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
- Shriners Hospitals for Children — 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 Louis Messer and Helen Messer Charitable Foundation C/O M Glasser?
Find your warmest path to The Louis Messer and Helen Messer Charitable Foundation C/O M Glasser 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.