Skip to content
The Sidney & Beatrice Albert Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Sidney & Beatrice Albert Foundation

Its FY2018 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$30k
Granted FY2018
8
Grants FY2018
4
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2018.

Human Services$92kInternational$23kAnimals$17kHousing & Shelter$15kCivil Rights$14kEducation$13kArts & Culture$13kFood & Nutrition$9kOther$0
02FY2018 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2018

  • Under $10k7 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE LAMP FOR HAITI FOUNDATION$10,000
EQUINOX INC$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$5,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
EAST LAKE COMMUNITY LIBRARY$1,000
WEDU$1,000
WUSF$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–17, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HUMAN NEEDS FOOD PANTRY: $5k → 16%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

NY
MA
OR
PA
NJ
CA
DC
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 100% of The Sidney & Beatrice Albert Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 63% of the giving stays in NY; by stated purpose, 0%.

The Sidney & Beatrice Albert Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

54%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$119k · 7 repeat orgs$102k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +275% since the first grant, against +95% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
23

Total granted

$119k
$100k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+275%
+95%

Still filing today

29%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18
AnimalsArts & CultureHousing & ShelterCivil RightsEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • JC
    JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    2× · 2017–2018 · $60k
  • TL
    THE LAMP FOR HAITI FOUNDATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $20k
  • EI
    EQUINOX INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $15k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • DO
    DAUGHTERS OF SARAH JEWISH FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $12k · revenue +75%
  • AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $12k · revenue +102%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
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
American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the District of Columbia

Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.

—
2
Animal Outlook Inc

Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

Animals
3
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
4
American Flood Coalition Inc

To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.

Environment
5
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
6
Food & Water Watch

Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…

Food & Nutrition
7
American Arbitration Association Inc

The american arbitration association ("aaa") is dedicated to effective, efficient and economical methods of dispute resolution through education, technology and solutions-oriented service.

Crime & Legal
8
Amazon Conservation Association

Amazon conservation unites science, people, and innovation to protect the amazon - the greatest wild forest on earth. as guardians of the most iconic forest on the planet, we bring together the power of the latest science and technology…

Environment
9
American Water Works Association

To promote public health, safety, and welfare through the improvement of the quality and quantity of drinking water and the development and furtherance of understanding of the problems relating thereto.

Public Benefit
10
Liberty Justice Center

To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…

Crime & Legal
11
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Iowa

The foundation works to defend and promote the constitution of the united states, focusing especially on the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, and 14th amendments. the foundation also works to defend and promote the constitution of the…

Civil Rights
12
Aclu Foundation of Massachusetts Inc

Aclu foundation of ma was established to defend freedoms guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights through public education and litigation.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mercy for Animals Inc; the most unlike its peers is Exoneration Initiative. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 31 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
13/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $60,000 · OtherJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERTHE LAMP FOR HAITI FOUNDATION: $20,000 · OtherTHE LAMP FOR HAITI FOUNDATIONDAUGHTERS OF SARAH JEWISH FOUNDATION INC: $12,000 · OtherDAUGHTERS OF SARAH JEWISH FOUNDATION INCIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWUSF: $6,000 · Other+15 more: $42,500 · Other+15 moreEQUINOX INC: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $9,000 · AnimalsMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $3,000 · AnimalsAsia Wild: $1,500 · AnimalsAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $11,500 · Civil RightsFLORIDA WEST COAST PUBLIC BROADCASTING INC: $6,000 · Arts & CultureAUSTERLITZ HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $2,500 · Arts & CultureNEW YORK PUBLIC RADIO: $1,500 · Arts & CultureALBANY LAW SCHOOL: $5,000 · EducationHUMAN NEEDS FOOD PANTRY INC: $5,000 · Human Services
Other$160,500Housing & Shelter$15,000Animals$13,500Civil Rights$11,500Arts & Culture$10,000Education$5,000Human Services$5,000

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 budgetEQUINOX INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDAUGHTERS OF SARAH JEWISH FOUNDATION INC: $12,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $11,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $9,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFLORIDA WEST COAST PUBLIC BROADCASTING INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetALBANY LAW SCHOOL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMAN NEEDS FOOD PANTRY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMercy Corps: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAUSTERLITZ HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $2,500 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEXONERATION INITIATIVE: $1,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetNEW YORK PUBLIC RADIO: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAsia Wild: $1,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

Ge Aerospace Foundati…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Ge Aerospace FoundationCT12× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ge Aerospace Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · 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 Sidney & Beatrice Albert Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Sidney & Beatrice Albert Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 47%
  • Mercy Corps: 47% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 31 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 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Sidney & Beatrice Albert’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