· Private foundation
The Schaffner Family 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 FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k14 grants · $209k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $406k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS | $75,000 |
| GIFTS UNDER 10000 | $71,136 |
| OXFAM AMERICA | $60,000 |
| WILDLANDS NETWORK | $35,000 |
| NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE | $25,000 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | $20,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $20,000 |
| SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE | $15,000 |
| ALARM WILL SOUND | $12,000 |
| BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS | $12,000 |
| RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK | $10,000 |
| METROPOLITAN OPERA | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 88% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +20% since the first grant, against -87% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 1 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, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC5× · 2020–2024 · $350k · revenue +26%
OXFAM-AMERICA INC5× · 2020–2024 · $280k · revenue +3%
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC5× · 2020–2024 · $245k · revenue +39%
Funded once
- MJMOTHER JONES INVESTIGATIVE FUNDone grant, 2020 · $10k
- SHSAG HARBOR PARTNERSHIP INCone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -87%
- GGREENPEACEone grant, 2023 · $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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
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 purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
Nrgi envisions a world where natural resources enable fair, prosperous and sustainable societies, instead of undermining them. nrgi exists because decisions about how natural resources are governed determine the well-being of people in…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
To raise awareness about the potential to reduce environmental harm by shifting electricity use to particular times; to encourage the development and spread of common protocols for this practice.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Human Rights Watch Inc and the most unlike its peers is Reporters Without Borders Inc. 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 37 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.
25 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. 25 of the 33 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 NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds University of Arizona Foundation ↗
- Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL ZERO ↗
- Who funds Rainforest Action Network ↗
- Who funds SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Wild Earth Society Incorporated ↗
- Who funds Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists ↗
- Who funds ALARM WILL SOUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds RAZOM INC ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GREENPEACE INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Reporters Without Borders Inc ↗
- Who funds THE HALO TRUST (USA) INC ↗
- Who funds SAG HARBOR PARTNERSHIP 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: John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Schaffner Family 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.
- Oxfam-America 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.