· Private foundation
The Silver Tie Fund Inc
Its FY2021 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2020.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k19 grants · $53k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Feeding America | $10,000 |
| Direct Relief | $10,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $10,000 |
| First Nation Development Institute | $5,000 |
| conservation law foundation | $5,000 |
| World Resource Institute | $4,000 |
| Union of Concerned Scientists | $4,000 |
| Planned Parenthood | $2,500 |
| Center for Coastal Studies | $2,500 |
| DEMOCRACY NOW | $2,500 |
| Equal Justice Initiative | $2,500 |
| Epilepsy Foundation of New England | $2,500 |
| Orleans Conservation Trust | $2,500 |
| gilead community services | $2,500 |
| Kestrel Land Trust | $2,500 |
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 (FY17–17, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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.
29 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2020, 12 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k 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
DIRECT RELIEF3× · 2017–2020 · $16k · revenue +94%
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC3× · 2017–2019 · $16k · revenue +102%
CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC4× · 2017–2020 · $15k · revenue +113%
Funded once
- FOFriends of Virgin Islands National Parkone grant, 2017 · $6k
- FFAIRVOTEgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $4k · revenue +69%
- OOneTreePlantedorgone grant, 2019 · $4k
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 organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
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…
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To partner with individuals and organizations to access, organize, and share data that inspires action that restores our environment.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Founded in 1889, the national association of regulatory utility commisioners (naruc) is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state public service commisions who regulate the utilities that provide essential services such…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Save the Bay Inc and the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. 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 39 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) — 3% 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.
41 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. 41 of the 50 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 DIRECT RELIEF ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION LAW FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ISRAEL FUND ↗
- Who funds CHARLES RIVER WATERSHED ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE BAY INC ↗
- Who funds 350ORG ↗
- Who funds DEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC ↗
- Who funds GILEAD COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds FRANKLIN LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds EPILEPSY FOUNDATION NEW ENGLAND ↗
- Who funds KESTREL LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds Appalachian Mountain Club ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR COASTAL STUDIES INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE POSSE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PROJECT BREAD-THE WALK FOR HUNGER INC ↗
- Who funds WAMC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds ORLEANS CONSERVATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INVOLVED IN SUSTAINING AGRICULTURE INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds POPULATION CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds FAIRVOTE ↗
- Who funds THE DOROTHY AND CHARLES MOSESIAN CENTER FOR THE ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds PRIMARY SOURCE INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC ↗
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: Boston Foundation Inc · The Lorber Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Aetna Foundation Inc · Verizon Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Silver Tie Fund 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.
- Watertown Community Foundation Inc — 95% of income from government
- Gilead Community Services Inc — 62% of income from government
- Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture Inc — 35% of income from government
- Center for Coastal Studies Inc — 26% of income from government
- Primary Source Inc — 23% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Epilepsy Foundation New England — 11% of income from government
- Charles River Watershed Association Inc — 8% of income from government
- Franklin Land Trust Inc — 7% of income from government
- Orleans Conservation Trust — 2% of income from government
- Appalachian Mountain Club — 1% 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.