Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Maxfield Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$2.4M
Granted FY2021
13
Grants FY2021
6
States reached
$2.3M
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of The Maxfield Foundation’s FY2023 grant dollars went to The Bessemer National Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year The Maxfield Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $2M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

10
17
8
18
10
19
10
20
9
21
3
22
0
23

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172023.

Philanthropy$4.7MEducation$4.1MInternational$1.0MScience & Tech$400kEnvironment$273kHealth$59kArts & Culture$35kYouth Development$13kOther$0
02FY2021 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k10 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.3M
$3,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RICE UNIVERSITY$2,300,000
SANTE FE INSTITUTE$100,000
AMAZON CONSERVATION$25,000
ACCESS FUND$4,000
SIERRA COMMUNITY HOUSE$3,500
TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST$3,000
TRUCKEE ROUNDHOUSE$3,000
THE TAHOE FUND$2,500
GATEWAY MOUNTAIN CENTER$2,000
HIGH FIVES FOUNDATION$2,000
ROCKER MEMORIAL SKATEPARK$1,000
NORTH TAHOE ARTS$1,000
I-SCHOOL$1,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–20, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%WARRIOR FOUNDATION FREEDOM STATION: $1k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

MN
MA
NV
NJ
CA
UT
CO
VA
NM
TX

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 86% of The Maxfield Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 48% of the giving stays in TX; read by stated purpose it is 39% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

The Maxfield Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 9.4% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.8M · 20 repeat orgs$98k to everyone else

20 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2021, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
11

Total granted

$5.8M
$97k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+83%

Still filing today

60%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22
HealthScience & TechArts & CultureEnvironmentEducationAnimalsOther

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

  • WM
    William Marsh Rice University
    2× · 2021–2022 · $2.6M · revenue +28%
  • SANTA FE INSTITUTE
    5× · 2017–2022 · $350k · revenue +219%
  • TA
    THE ACCESS FUND
    5× · 2017–2021 · $17k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • S
    SFI
    one grant, 2019 · $50k
  • MA
    MONTALVO ASSOCIATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $30k · revenue +83%
  • LT
    LAKE TAHOE SCHOOL
    one grant, 2017 · $5k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Sierra Watch

Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.

Environment
2
Truckee Trails Foundation Inc

The Truckee Trails Foundation (TTF) is working towards a system of trails and bikeways in and around Truckee, California that will connect people and places, reduce our community's dependence on automobiles, and improve our physical,…

Environment
3
Tahoe Community Foundation

The Foundation envisions a thriving community created through meaningful philanthropy, inclusive communication, and the willingness to explore possibilities together.

Education
4
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

5
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
6
Truckee River Watershed Council

The truckee river watershed council was founded to implement locally developed public-private collaborative solutions to protect and improve water quality and biological resources for the sustainable environmental and economic health of…

Environment
7
Sierra State Parks Foundation

The Sierra State Parks Foundation provides critically needed financial and professional support to the Lake Tahoe-Donner Sierra State Parks for Education, Restoration, and Cultural and Environmental Preservation in partnership with…

Recreation & Sports
8
Tahoe Institute for Natural Science

To advance the natural history, conservation and ecosystem knowledge of the Tahoe region through science, education and outreach.

Environment
9
Teton Regional Land Trust Inc

The mission of the teton regional land trust is to conserve working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and scenic open spaces in eastern idaho for this and future generations.

Environment
10
Mltpa Foundation

To plan, steward, interpret, promote, and sustain a system of four-season trails and public access to natural areas in the Mammoth Lakes and Eastern Sierra Nevada region in the state of California while protecting its natural resources.

Environment
11
Santa Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship

Santa Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship is creating and maintaining world-class trails responsibly, sustainably, and collectively.

Environment
12
Conservation Farms & Ranches

Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.

Housing & Shelter

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tahoe Fund and the most unlike its peers is William Marsh Rice University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

19 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 34 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
15/19
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE BESSEMER GIVING FUND — $4,663,033 · PhilanthropyTHE BESSEMER GIVING FUND+2 more — $9,000 · PhilanthropyRICE UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF DEVELOPMENT — $2,500,000 · OtherRICE UNIVERSITY OFFICE OF DE…+21 more — $129,500 · OtherWilliam Marsh Rice University — $2,600,000 · EducationWilliam Marsh Rice Universi…SANTA FE INSTITUTE — $350,000 · Science & TechAMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM — $225,000 · Science & TechLUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH — $50,000 · HealthOPERATION SURF — $3,000 · HealthMONTALVO ASSOCIATION — $30,000 · Arts & CultureTRUCKEE ROUNDHOUSE — $4,000 · Arts & CultureTAHOE FUND — $15,500 · EnvironmentTRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST — $12,000 · Environment
Philanthropy$4,672,033Other$2,629,500Education$2,600,000Science & Tech$575,000Health$53,000Arts & Culture$34,000Environment$27,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE BESSEMER GIVING FUND — $4,663,033 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetWilliam Marsh Rice University — $2,600,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSANTA FE INSTITUTE — $350,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetAMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM — $225,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetLUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH — $50,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMONTALVO ASSOCIATION — $30,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHE ACCESS FUND — $17,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTAHOE FUND — $15,500 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetGATEWAY MOUNTAIN CENTER INC — $12,500 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetTRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST — $12,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCHARITYSMITH NONPROFIT FOUNDATION — $6,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTRUCKEE ROUNDHOUSE — $4,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTAHOE TRUCKEE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOPERATION SURF — $3,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetLake Tahoe Wildlife Care Inc — $1,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE WILDCAT SANCTUARY — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWARRIOR FOUNDATION FREEDOM STATION — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNorth Tahoe Arts — $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budget
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 BESSEMER GIVING FUND
  • Who funds William Marsh Rice University
  • Who funds SANTA FE INSTITUTE
  • Who funds AMAZON CONSERVATION TEAM
  • Who funds LUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH
  • Who funds MONTALVO ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds THE ACCESS FUND
  • Who funds TAHOE FUND
  • Who funds GATEWAY MOUNTAIN CENTER INC
  • Who funds TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST
  • Who funds CHARITYSMITH NONPROFIT FOUNDATION
  • Who funds TRUCKEE ROUNDHOUSE
  • Who funds TAHOE TRUCKEE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
  • Who funds OPERATION SURF
  • Who funds REVERT FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds Lake Tahoe Wildlife Care Inc
  • Who funds THE WILDCAT SANCTUARY
  • Who funds WARRIOR FOUNDATION FREEDOM STATION
  • Who funds North Tahoe Arts

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.

Tahoe Community FoundationNV15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tahoe Community Foundation · Martis Camp Community Foundation Dba Martis Camp Foundation · Tahoe Truckee Community Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · The Bessemer Giving Fund · Greater Horizons · The San Francisco Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Maxfield 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 34 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph