Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Seiler 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.

$7k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Health$19kRecreation & Sports$14kAnimals$10kEducation$4kHuman Services$1kFood & Nutrition$500
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$1,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$40k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHALLENGED ATHLETES FOUNDATION$5,000
LAKE CUYAMACA REC PARKS$1,500
HEARTLAND HUNGER RESOURCE CENTER$500
02The need
03

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 (FY24–24, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CHALLENGED ATHLETES FOUNDATION: $5k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$26k · 5 repeat orgs$22k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +78% since the first grant, against +52% for the ones you funded once.

5 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
10

Total granted

$26k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+78%
+52%

Still filing today

40%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationAnimalsHuman ServicesOther

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

  • SL
    ST LUKE'S MCCALL FOUNDATION
    2× · 2018–2019 · $12k · revenue +14%
  • LC
    LAKE CUYAMACA REC PARKS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $5k
  • US
    UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION
    4× · 2017–2020 · $3k · revenue +78%

Funded once

  • EF
    ECOFLIX FOUNDATION INC FKA CAMBODIAN WILDLIFE SANCTUARY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +707%
  • YC
    YMCA CAMP AT HORSETHIEF RESERVOIR
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
  • IC
    INTERFAITH COMMUNITY CENTER
    one grant, 2021 · $1k

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.

1
Cardinal Health Foundation
Education
2
Los Angeles Medical Center Foundation
Health
3
Dcm Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Foundation for Cardiovascular Research and Innovations
Philanthropy
5
James P McCarron Jr Medical Foundation Inc
6
The Smd Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Cal Med Foundation
Education
8
The Mccall Family Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Md Anderson Foundation
Philanthropy
10
The Mcconnell Foundation
Philanthropy
11
The Heart Foundation

The heart foundation (thf) was created to save lives from heart disease by increasing awareness, educating the public, and supporting innovative research at smidt heart institute at cedars-sinai medical center in los angeles, california.…

Philanthropy
12
Urologic Cancer Foundation

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Uc San Diego Foundation and the most unlike its peers is All Heart Gunner Foundation. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 17 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ST LUKE'S MCCALL FOUNDATION — $12,000 · OtherST LUKE'S MCCALL FOUNDATIONLAKE CUYAMACA REC PARKS — $5,000 · OtherLAKE CUYAMACA REC PARKSLAKE CUYAMACA PARK & RECREATION — $3,000 · OtherLAKE CUYAMACA PARK & RECREATIONUCSD HEALTH SYSTEM — $3,000 · OtherUCSD HEALTH SYSTEMYMCA CAMP AT HORSETHIEF RESERVOIR — $1,000 · OtherINTERFAITH COMMUNITY CENTER — $1,000 · OtherMCCALL LIBRARY FOUNDATION — $1,000 · Other+2 more — $1,000 · OtherECOFLIX FOUNDATION INC FKA CAMBODIAN WILDLIFE SANCTUARY INC — $10,000 · AnimalsECOFLIX FOUNDATION INC …CHALLENGED ATHLETES INC — $5,000 · Human ServicesCHALLENGED …UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION — $3,285 · EducationMCCALL DONNELLY EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $240 · EducationSUMMIT FOR STEM CELL FOUNDATION — $1,000 · HealthALL HEART GUNNER FOUNDATION — $500 · HealthAmerican Heart Association Inc — $500 · HealthTHE DLH FOUNDATION DBA SAVE OUR STOMACHS — $260 · Health
Other$27,000Animals$10,000Human Services$5,000Education$3,525Health$2,260

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetST LUKE'S MCCALL FOUNDATION — $12,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetECOFLIX FOUNDATION INC FKA CAMBODIAN WILDLIFE SANCTUARY INC — $10,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetCHALLENGED ATHLETES INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION — $3,285 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSUMMIT FOR STEM CELL FOUNDATION — $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DLH FOUNDATION DBA SAVE OUR STOMACHS — $260 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMCCALL DONNELLY EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $240 over 1y, 0.4% of budget
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 organization The Seiler 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 17 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

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

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph