How much did The Schooner Foundation grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 60% of The Schooner Foundation’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

beyond benigntinga tingatinga talestales productionhonorscholarshipryr

2019

annunciationblock medicalwomen's healthshining hopeugandarights policylittle sisters

2020

pandemic reliefcovidimmigrantafricahkscapitalkennedy

2021

kenyatornado reliefconservancykennedyinternationalcapitalinnocence

2022

ukraine emergencyafghan resettlementresettlement statesaction ukraineemergency responsebuildingcrisis action

2023

membershipexecutive directordirector positionchallengeearthquake emergencymauiking baudouin

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 123 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k20 grants · $80k
$10k–50k23 grants · $400k
$50k–250k56 grants · $5.5M
$250k+24 grants · $13M

$86,000

Median grant

States reached

$254M

Total assets

Largest grants

NAACP$2,000,000
NAACP$1,500,000
The Nature Conservancy$1,350,000
Trustees of Boston University$1,000,000
Brigham and Women's Hospital$625,000
Here Right Matters Foundation$590,000
Brigham and Women's Hospital$500,000
Trustees of Boston University$500,000
State Leadership Project$500,000
American Ireland Fund$444,485
Turquoise Mountain Foundation$350,000
Partners in Health a Non Profit Corporation$300,000
NAACP$258,000
African Visionary Fund$250,000
Massachusetts General Hospital$250,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $2.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 10%. 54% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 5% of The Schooner Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 40% of the giving stays in MA; read by stated purpose it is 36% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

The Schooner Foundationlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 5.8% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$65M · 163 repeat orgs$11M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +93% since the first grant, against +48% for the ones you funded once.

163 repeat relationships — 87 still active in FY2024, 76 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

163

Total granted

$65M

$7.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+93%

+48%

Still filing today

63%

39%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.8M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationInternationalHealthHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementEnvironmentOther

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

Trustees of Boston University
8× · 2017–2024 · $5.3M · revenue +32%
SG
Seed Global Health Inc
7× · 2017–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +114%
President and Fellows of Harvard College
3× · 2019–2021 · $1.8M · revenue +5%

Funded once

BU
Boston University
one grant, 2017 · $2.5M
PI
Partners in Health
one grant, 2023 · $289k
UO
U of California - HEAL
one grant, 2021 · $250k

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

04Your field

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.

International Peace Institute Inc

The international peace institute is an independent, non-profit organization working to strengthen inclusive multilateralism for a more peaceful and sustainable planet. through its research, convening, and strategic advising, ipi provides…

International

Global Impact Investing Network Inc

Increase the scale and effectiveness of impact investing to solve systemic problems facing people and the planet.

Philanthropy

Foreign Policy Research Institute

Highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on u.s. foreign policy

International

Witness Inc

Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…

International

Pathfinder International

Pathfinder builds lasting and trusted local partnerships to strengthen health systems, forging resilient pathways to sexual and reproductive health and rights for all.

International

The International Institute for

International

American Jewish World Service Inc

We work to realize human rights and end poverty in africa, asia, latin america and the caribbean.

International

Upturn Inc

Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.

—

Global Ties Us

To build trust and advance peace and prosperity though international exchange.

International

Indigenous Peoples Rights Inc

Lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples for collective empowerment and action.

Human Services

Pyxera Global Inc

To reinvent how public, private, and social interests engage to solve global challenges.

International

Robert a Toigo Foundation

Developing innovative, human-centered leaders to drive excellence in finance.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Issue One and the most unlike its peers is Hobart and William Smith Colleges. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 19 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/163

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,402

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.

06the grantee network

158 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

156/158

Grantees still filing

118/158

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$49,547,365Education$6,926,517International$6,805,946Health$5,188,924Human Services$3,207,500Public Benefit$2,725,035Community Improvement$1,630,028

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.

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.

Boston Foundation IncMA29.1× affinity21 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boston Foundation Inc · The Healing Trust · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · The Community Foundation of Middle · Hopewell Fund · Eastern Bank Foundation · Memorial Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · New Venture Fund · United Way of Middle Tennessee Inc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Liberty Mutual Foundation Inc

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 organisation The Schooner 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

35get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Iungo XL.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

2 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 841984182 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on Iungo XL, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2025; revenue held over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 100% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to The Schooner Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Schooner Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

The Schooner Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

158 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Schooner Foundation?

More from the funding graph

The Schooner Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

158 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The Schooner Foundation?

More from the funding graph