· Private foundation
The Melampy-Lawrence Charitable Trust
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 placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k15 grants · $340k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
- $250k+2 grants · $900k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S | $500,000 |
| DANA FARBER | $400,000 |
| MT SINAI ICAHN SCHOOL | $50,000 |
| COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY | $40,000 |
| DUNSTABLE RURAL LAND TRUST | $30,000 |
| MUSEUM OF SCIENCE | $30,000 |
| THE UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH | $30,000 |
| BARNSTABLE LAND TRUST | $25,000 |
| SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST | $25,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC | $25,000 |
| NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE | $25,000 |
| JOSLIN DIABETES CENTER | $20,000 |
| COMPASSION CONSORTIUM | $15,000 |
| APPLEWILD SCHOOL | $15,000 |
| LAWRENCE ACADEMY | $15,000 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 80% 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.
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.
31 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 2 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; $40k 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
- DIDANA-FARBER INC7× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +145%
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC6× · 2017–2022 · $1.1M · revenue +62%- DRDUNSTABLE RURAL LAND TRUST9× · 2017–2025 · $639k · revenue +15% · 65% of their budget
Funded once
THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATIONone grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue +24%- IMINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPSone grant, 2017 · $60k
- SPSAMARITAN'S PURSEgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $55k · revenue +134%
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 museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) is a world-renowned center for biological discovery and training that is notably affiliated with more than 60 Nobel Prize winners. Research is conducted by full-time faculty as well as hundreds of the…
The mission of lowell observatory is to pursue the study of astronomy, especially the study of our solar system and its evolution; to conduct pure research in astronomical phenomena; and to maintain quality public education and outreach…
Mission strengthened by more than a century and a half of dedication to academic excellence, boston college commits itself to the highest standards of teaching and research in undergraduate, graduate and professional programs and to the…
The program mission of the quebec-labrador foundation u.s. is defined by a regional component (new england and eastern canada), and an international component, which ties our regional model to a global conservation network. qlf's program…
Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New England Aquarium Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Samaritan's Purse. 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 56 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% 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 11% 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 47 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 DANA-FARBER INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds DUNSTABLE RURAL LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds BARNSTABLE LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF SCIENCE ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF LAWRENCE ACADEMY AT GROTON MA CORP ↗
- Who funds APPLEWILD SCHOOL INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
- Who funds GROTON SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Corporation ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS ↗
- Who funds ISABELLA STEWART GARDNER MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds JOSLIN DIABETES CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds BOSTON SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND AQUARIUM CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds NASHOBA CONSERVATION TRUST ↗
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: Fidelity Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Melampy-Lawrence Charitable Trust 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.
- Joslin Diabetes Center Inc — 35% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- New England Aquarium Corporation — 12% of income from government
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Barnstable Land Trust Inc — 4% of income from government
- Massachusetts Audubon Society Inc — 1% of income from government
- Boston Symphony Orchestra Inc — 0% of income from government
- Museum of Science — 0% of income from government
- Museum of Fine Arts — 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 Melampy-Lawrence Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to The Melampy-Lawrence Charitable Trust 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.