· Private foundation
The Sheftel Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BOCA RATON REGIONAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION INC | $8,900 |
| NEPHCURE KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL | $4,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA | $2,500 |
| UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD | $2,500 |
| WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY | $2,500 |
| MIDDLEBURY COLLEGE | $2,500 |
| HARVARD UNIVERSITY | $2,500 |
| NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY | $1,000 |
| DARTMOUTH COLLEGE HILLEL | $1,000 |
| ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIOLOGICAL LAB | $1,000 |
| CONGREGATION SHA'ARAY SHALOM | $1,000 |
| MOUNTAIN FAMILY CENTER | $1,000 |
| BOULDER MOUNTAIN BIKE ALLIANCE | $500 |
| NATIONAL SPORTS CENTER FOR THE DISABLED | $500 |
| BOULDER COLLECTIVE | $500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 93% of those 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 +60% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.
43 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2025, 26 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
- NKNEPHCURE KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL9× · 2017–2025 · $48k · revenue +81%
- NSNATIONAL SPORTS CENTER FOR THE DISABLED INC8× · 2018–2025 · $7k · revenue +76%
- PAPresident and Fellows of Middlebury College2× · 2022–2025 · $5k · revenue +3%
Funded once
The President and Trustees of Colby Collegeone grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue -7%- MCMASS COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTSone grant, 2022 · $3k
- NYNew York Universitygraduatedone grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +30%
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 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.
The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…
Education, research, medical services and other public services.
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…
Education and Research
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 bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
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…
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
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.…
Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…
As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of America and the most unlike its peers is Marigold Charitable Trust. 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 42 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
89 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. 89 of the 145 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 NEPHCURE KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds Boca Raton Regional Hospital Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL SPORTS CENTER FOR THE DISABLED INC ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Middlebury College ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSS ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY AT GOTHIC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN FAMILY CENTER ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF COLORADO AVALANCHE INFORMATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL BRAIN TUMOR SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
- Who funds The President and Trustees of Colby College ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Wellesley College ↗
- Who funds WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF HARTFORD ↗
- Who funds Davidson College ↗
- Who funds SKIDMORE COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF RICHMOND ↗
- Who funds LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF THE SMITH COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF CAPE COD INC ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF COLORADO ↗
- Who funds ELI AND BESSIE COHEN CAMPS OF MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
- Who funds PROTECT OUR WINTERS ↗
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: Colorado Gives Foundation · Community Foundation Boulder County · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment 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 Sheftel Foundation Inc 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.
- The Home for Little Wanderers Inc — 38% of income from government
- Force-Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered Inc — 15% of income from government
- Worcester Polytechnic Institute — 8% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Handel and Haydn Society — 2% of income from government
- The Trustees of the Smith College — 1% of income from government
- University of Hartford — 1% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Middlebury College — 1% of income from government
- Wesleyan University — 1% of income from government
- Wellesley College — 1% of income from government
- New World Symphony Inc — 0% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project 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.