· Private foundation
The Moore Charitable Foundation Inc
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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k105 grants · $354k
- $10k–50k38 grants · $821k
- $50k–250k27 grants · $2.0M
- $250k+10 grants · $20M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND | $5,000,000 |
| BESSEMER GIVING FUND | $5,000,000 |
| THE BACON FOUNDATION | $3,800,000 |
| NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND, INC. | $2,000,000 |
| DUKE UNIVERSITY CONCENTRATION ACCOUNT | $1,500,000 |
| SOUTHAMPTON HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $1,000,000 |
| YALE UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT | $577,138 |
| ROCKY MOUNTAIN ELK FOUNDATION | $400,000 |
| NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE | $250,000 |
| SOUTHAMPTON TOWN AQUATICS & RECREATION CORP. | $250,000 |
| CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN’S FOUNDATION | $190,000 |
| GROUP FOR THE EAST END, INC. | $170,000 |
| PENNY'S FLIGHT FOUNDATION | $125,000 |
| PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE RSO ACCOUNT | $100,000 |
| GEORGIA O'KEEFFE MUSEUM | $100,000 |
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 +28% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
214 repeat relationships — 119 still active in FY2024, 95 since wound down; 55 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.3M 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
- NYNEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC4× · 2021–2024 · $8.0M · revenue +8%
- TSTHE SOUTHAMPTON HOSPITAL FOUNDATION INC3× · 2021–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +215%
- GVGREEN VALE SCHOOL6× · 2019–2024 · $800k · revenue +26%
Funded once
- TRTHEODORE ROOSEVELT PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $1.2M · revenue -3%
- NYNEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN HOSPITALone grant, 2019 · $1.0M
- UOUniversity of Kentucky Research Foundationone grant, 2022 · $769k · revenue +11%
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
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 mission of the hudson river foundation is to inspire and inform action through science and engaging people to enhance the hudson river, estuary, and watershed (see schedule o).
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
The mission of the new canaan land trust is to foster a connection between the new canaan community and its natural resources through the conservation and sustainable stewardship of our open space.
The adirondack council ensures the ecological integrity (clean water and air, wildlife habitat, etc.), wild character (solitude, scenic beauty, etc.), and vibrant communities of new york's six-million-acre adirondack park. the adirondack…
Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…
See schedule onylcv is a non-partisan policy making and political action organization that works to make environmental protection a top priority with elected officials, decision-makers and the voters by evaluating incumbent performance and…
Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
Northeast wilderness trust is a regional land trust working to preserve and restore forever-wild landscapes for nature and people in new york, vermont, new hampshire, maine, massachusetts and connecticut.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Taos Community Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Boiling Spring Lakes Fire Rescue. 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 32 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
256 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. 256 of the 540 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 BESSEMER GIVING FUND ↗
- Who funds DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds THE SOUTHAMPTON HOSPITAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds Yale University ↗
- Who funds THEODORE ROOSEVELT PRESIDENTIAL LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GREEN VALE SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds University of Kentucky Research Foundation ↗
- Who funds PECONIC LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE STRONGHOLD FUND ↗
- Who funds THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
- Who funds The New Center ↗
- Who funds COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA O'KEEFFE MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds GROUP FOR THE EAST END INC ↗
- Who funds CLIENTEARTH USA INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHAMPTON TOWN AQUATICS AND RECREATION CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds THE PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL HIGH SCHOOL IN VIRGINIA ↗
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: The Taos Community Foundation Inc · The New York Community Trust · Rk Mellon Family Foundation · Gates Family Foundation · Z Smith Reynolds Foundation Inc · Marshall L and Perrine D McCune Charitable Foundation Inc · Reed Family Foundation Inc · Santa Fe Community Foundation · Robertson Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Patagoniaorg
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Moore Charitable Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Moore Charitable Foundation Inc 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.