· Private foundation
The Mosse Foundation
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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k25 grants · $65k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k7 grants · $952k
- $250k+1 grant · $340k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PAROS FOUNDATION | $340,163 |
| BERKELEY REPERTORY THEATRE | $236,000 |
| MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $200,000 |
| CORNELL UNIVERSITY | $200,000 |
| UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION | $110,000 |
| PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT | $100,000 |
| HUMBOLDT UNIVERSITAT ZU BERLIN | $56,287 |
| NORTHSIDE CENTER FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT | $50,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WI FOUNDATION | $35,000 |
| LESLEY UNIVERSITY | $30,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| WGBH | $15,000 |
| KQED | $10,000 |
| COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY | $7,500 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF GREATER BOSTON | $6,023 |
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 (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 36% of your 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 +44% since the first grant, against +24% for the ones you funded once.
40 repeat relationships — 29 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 7 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, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k 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
- TPTHE PAROS FOUNDATION6× · 2019–2024 · $1.9M · revenue +75%
- NCNORTHSIDE CENTER FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT INC6× · 2019–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +19%
- BRBERKELEY REPERTORY THEATRE6× · 2019–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +2%
Funded once
- LOLIBRARY OF CONGRESS JAMES MADISON COUNCILone grant, 2020 · $25k
- HCHAAS CLEANTECH TO MARKET PROGRAMHAAS CLEANTECH TO MARKET PROGRAMone grant, 2023 · $25k
- HSHAAS SCHOOL OF BUSINESS UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEYone grant, 2022 · $25k
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 bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
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.
Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.
Organization's mission: boston university is an international, comprehensive, private research university, committed to educating students to be reflective, resourceful individuals ready to live, adapt, and lead in an interconnected world.…
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…
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…
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
Manhattan university is an independent catholic instituion of higher learning that embraces qualified men and women of all faiths, cultures, and traditions. the mission of manhattan university is to provide a contemporary, person-centered…
The mission of rhode island school of design, through its college and museum,is to educate its students and the public in the creation and (see schedule o)appreciation of works of art and design, to discover and transmit knowledge and to…
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.
The organization's primary exempt purpose is to provide access to and conduct activities in furtherance of higher education.
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dress for Success Worldwide and the most unlike its peers is The Paros Foundation. 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 41 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% 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 14% 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.
41 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. 41 of the 68 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 THE PAROS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NORTHSIDE CENTER FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds BERKELEY REPERTORY THEATRE ↗
- Who funds Cornell University ↗
- Who funds SIMONS LAUFER MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds LESLEY UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds KQED INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY GREATER BOSTON INC ↗
- Who funds CASTINE HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD FOR FREE COMMITTEE INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNT AUBURN HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds TRINITY BOSTON CONNECTS INC ↗
- Who funds Tiba Foundation ↗
- Who funds Pacific Pinball Museum ↗
- Who funds CARITAS COMMUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD FILM SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT SAVE ARMENIAN PHOTOGRAPH ARCHIVES INC ↗
- Who funds MARTHA'S VINEYARD PRESERVATION TRUST 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: Boston Foundation Inc · Rockland Trust Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Network for Good · 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 Mosse 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.
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Commonwealth Kitchen Inc — 9% of income from government
- Zumix Inc — 5% of income from government
- Mount Auburn Hospital — 5% of income from government
- Martha's Vineyard Preservation Trust Inc — 4% of income from government
- Best Buddies International Inc — 4% of income from government
- Food for Free Committee Inc — 3% of income from government
- Sheriff's Meadow Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Martha's Vineyard Film Society Inc — 2% of income from government
- Lesley University — 1% of income from government
- Museum of Fine Arts — 0% of income from government
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge 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.