Skip to content
The Schaffner Family Foundation at a glance

· 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.

$615k
Granted FY2024still arriving
19
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

International$997kEnvironment$760kScience & Tech$637kArts & Culture$172kEducation$125kAnimals$55kPublic Benefit$30kCivil Rights$15k
02FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k14 grants · $209k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $406k
$15,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION$100,000
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL$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
BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS$12,000
ALARM WILL SOUND$12,000
GLOBAL WITNESS$10,000
THE HALO TRUST$10,000
EARTH JUSTICE$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 88% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK: $20k → 10%GUILD HALL: $50k → 7%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL: $100k → 17%350ORG: $15k → 20%WILDLANDS NETWORK: $15k → 8%BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS: $20k → 14%RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK: $20k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL: $75k → 17%BULLETIN OF THE ATOMIC SCIENTISTS: $12k → 14%RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK: $20k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL: $75k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA FOUNDATION: $100k → 15%GIFTS UNDER 10000: $71k → 17%OXFAM AMERICA: $75k → 14%SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE: $15k → 15%GIFTS UNDER 10000: $66k → 17%OXFAM AMERICA: $65k → 14%SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE: $15k → 15%GIFTS UNDER 10000: $65k → 17%OXFAM AMERICA: $60k → 14%SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE: $15k → 15%GIFTS UNDER 10000: $62k → 17%OXFAM AMERICA: $55k → 14%SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE: $15k → 15%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL: $50k → 17%OXFAM AMERICA: $25k → 14%SIERA CLUB FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNSEL: $50k → 17%SIERA CLUB FOUNDATION: $20k → 10%GIFTS UNDER 10000: $46k → 17%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $75k → 17%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $60k → 17%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $60k → 17%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $30k → 17%DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS: $20k → 17%GLOBAL ZERO: $35k → 14%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $30k → 17%GLOBAL ZERO: $25k → 14%GLOBAL ZERO: $20k → 14%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 17%NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE: $25k → 14%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $20k → 17%NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE: $25k → 14%NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE: $25k → 14%RAZOM: $25k → 17%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $15k → 17%NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE: $25k → 14%NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE: $25k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
CA
UT
VA
AZ
DC
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.7M · 28 repeat orgs$35k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +16% since the first grant, against -87% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

28
3

Total granted

$2.7M
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
-87%

Still filing today

79%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalEnvironmentArts & CultureEducationAnimalsPublic BenefitOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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 INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $350k · revenue +26%
  • OXFAM-AMERICA INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $280k · revenue +16%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $245k · revenue +39%

Funded once

  • MJ
    MOTHER JONES INVESTIGATIVE FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • SH
    SAG HARBOR PARTNERSHIP INC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -87%
  • G
    GREENPEACE
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
Rainforest Foundation Inc

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.

Environment
4
World Resources Institute

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…

International
5
Natural Resource Governance Institute

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…

International
6
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

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.

Crime & Legal
7
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
8
Friends of the Earth

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…

Environment
9
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
10
Watttime Corporation

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.

Science & Tech
11
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
12
Namati Inc

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.…

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Human Rights Watch Inc; 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.
04the grantee network

25 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2026, 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
15/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OXFAM-AMERICA INC: $280,260 · InternationalOXFAM-AMERICA INCTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $275,000 · InternationalTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INCMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $245,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $127,000 · InternationalHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INCNUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INC: $125,000 · InternationalNUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INCAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC: $90,000 · InternationalAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INCGLOBAL ZERO: $85,000 · InternationalGLOBAL ZERO+2 more: $45,000 · InternationalGIFTS UNDER 10000: $309,752 · OtherGIFTS UNDER 10000Individual grant recipient: $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipien…SIERA CLUB FOUNDATION: $55,000 · OtherSIERA CLUB FOUNDATIONBulletin of the Atomic Scientists: $52,500 · OtherBulletin of the Atomic Sc…METROPOLITAN OPERA: $40,000 · OtherMETROPOLITAN OPERAWILD EARTH GUARDIANS: $25,000 · Other+5 more: $75,000 · Other+5 moreNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $350,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFEN…Rainforest Action Network: $80,000 · EnvironmentRainforest Action Netwo…SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE: $60,000 · EnvironmentSKY ISLAND ALLIANCETHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $40,000 · EnvironmentTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY350ORG: $35,000 · Environment350ORG+1 more: $15,000 · EnvironmentUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $125,000 · EducationWild Earth Society Incorporated: $60,000 · Arts & CultureALARM WILL SOUND INC: $52,000 · Arts & CultureSAG HARBOR PARTNERSHIP INC: $10,000 · Arts & CulturePROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC: $30,000 · Public BenefitAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 · AnimalsReporters Without Borders Inc: $15,000 · Civil Rights
International$1,272,260Other$617,252Environment$580,000Education$125,000Arts & Culture$122,000Public Benefit$30,000Animals$30,000Civil Rights$15,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $350,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $280,260 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $275,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $245,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $127,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $125,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INC: $125,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC: $90,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBAL ZERO: $85,000 over 4y, 2.8% of budgetRainforest Action Network: $80,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetWild Earth Society Incorporated: $60,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetSKY ISLAND ALLIANCE: $60,000 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetBulletin of the Atomic Scientists: $52,500 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetALARM WILL SOUND INC: $52,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $40,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetRAZOM INC: $35,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budget350ORG: $35,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC: $30,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGREENPEACE INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetReporters Without Borders Inc: $15,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSAG HARBOR PARTNERSHIP INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE HALO TRUST (USA) INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, 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 University of Arizona Foundation ↗
  • Who funds NUCLEAR THREAT INITIATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL ZERO ↗
  • Who funds Rainforest Action Network ↗
  • Who funds Wild Earth Society Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE ↗
  • 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 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds GREENPEACE INC ↗
  • Who funds Reporters Without Borders Inc ↗
  • Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds SAG HARBOR PARTNERSHIP INC ↗
  • Who funds THE HALO TRUST (USA) INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

John D and Catherine …Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
John D and Catherine T Macarthur FoundationIL13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Schaffner Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Schaffner Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Oxfam-America Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 33 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Schaffner Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home