Skip to content
Alice Rosenwald Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Alice Rosenwald Fund

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.

$1.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
23
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$1.3M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Health$6.0MArts & Culture$279kReligion$113kCivil Rights$100kEducation$75kFood & Nutrition$25kPhilanthropy$25kHuman Services$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k16 grants · $71k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $115k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.3M
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
STEP BY STEP SUPPORTED LIVING INC$1,250,000
STEP BY STEP SUPPORTED LIVING INC$200,000
MCLEAN HOSPITAL$25,000
MCLEAN HOSPITAL$25,000
MCLEAN HOSPITAL$25,000
MCLEAN HOSPITAL$25,000
BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL$15,000
JCC ROCKLAND$6,000
NEWYORK-PRESBYTERIAN$5,000
AMATEUR ASTRONOMERS ASSOCIATION$5,000
LIFE RECAPTURED INC$5,000
HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY$5,000
HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY$5,000
HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY$5,000
LIFE RECAPTURED INC$5,000
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 (FY21–25, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%JCC Rockland: $21k → 14%LIFE RECAPTURED INC: $5k → 10%JCC ROCKLAND: $10k → 14%LIFE RECAPTURED INC: $5k → 10%JCC ROCKLAND: $6k → 14%LIFE RECAPTURED INC: $5k → 10%JCC ROCKLAND: $6k → 14%LIFE RECAPTURED INC: $5k → 10%JCC Rockland: $6k → 14%JCC ROCKLAND: $6k → 14%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.
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.2M · 10 repeat orgs$461k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
16

Total granted

$6.2M
$455k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+17%

Still filing today

50%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHuman ServicesFood & NutritionCivil RightsEnvironmentYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • LU
    LEHIGH UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2022–2023 · $75k · revenue +18%
  • JR
    JCC ROCKLAND INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $55k · revenue +65%
  • OO
    OLA OF EASTERN LONG ISLAND INC
    3× · 2022–2025 · $23k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE UNITED STATESgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $250k · revenue +40%
  • CR
    CHILDREN'S RIGHTS INC
    one grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue -67%
  • TG
    The Goldberg Charitable Corporation
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
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
New York Dental Affiliates Pc

Operating as an integral part of the nyc health + hospitals ("h+h"), formerly the new york city health and hospitals corporation. nyda will further h+h's tax-exempt charitable, scientific, and educational purposes by enhancing the…

Health
2
Foundation for Ethnic Understanding

Diverse racial and ethnic communities relations. promote understanding and cooperation between and among ethnic groups and reduce tensions among diverse racial and ethnic communities.

Philanthropy
3
The Economic Club of New York

The economic club of new york is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, nonpolitical organization dedicated to the promotion of the study and discussion of social, economic and political questions. for more than a century, the club has served as the…

Social Science
4
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
5
The American Institute of Architects

Vision: drive positive change through the power of design and focused activism.mission: aia inspires and empowers architects to improve society and transform the world.

—
6
Aquidneck Island Land Trust

To preserve and steward aquidneck island's open spaces for the lasting benefit of the community while connecting people with the land that defines the island's natural character.

Environment
7
Long Island University

To provide excellence and access in private higher education to those who seek to expand their knowledge and prepare themselves for meaningful, educated lives and for service to their communities and the world.

—
8
American Museum of Natural History

The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."

Arts & Culture
9
The Evergreens Cemetery

The evergreens, located in brooklyn, new york is a nonsectarian not-for-profit membership corporation and is a regulated cemetery corporation under the new york state cemetery law. its mission is to sell lots, graves and other space to the…

—
10
New York Botanical Garden

The new york botanical garden is a museum of plants and a scientific research center devoted to the study of plants and their uses. it is the garden's mission to improve public understanding of the natural world, horticulture, and the…

Environment
11
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
12
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Asian Americans for Equality Inc; the most unlike its peers is Inspirational Triathlon Racing International Corp. 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

18 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. 18 of the 27 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
10/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

STEP BY STEP SUPPORTED LIVING INC: $5,325,000 · OtherSTEP BY STEP SUPPORTED LIVING INCMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED: $485,000 · OtherMASS GENERAL BRIGHAM INCORPORATED+14 more: $318,250 · OtherNATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE UNITED STATES: $250,000 · Arts & CultureOLA OF EASTERN LONG ISLAND INC: $23,000 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $5,500 · Arts & CultureCHILDREN'S RIGHTS INC: $100,000 · Civil RightsLEHIGH UNIVERSITY: $75,000 · EducationJCC ROCKLAND INC: $55,000 · Human ServicesLIFE RECAPTURED INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesCITYMEALS-ON-WHEELS: $20,000 · Food & NutritionSPRINGS FOOD PANTRY INC: $5,000 · Food & NutritionTHE CLAMSHELL FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 · Environment
Other$6,128,250Arts & Culture$278,500Civil Rights$100,000Education$75,000Human Services$75,000Food & Nutrition$25,000Environment$15,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION IN THE UNITED STATES: $250,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCHILDREN'S RIGHTS INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLEHIGH UNIVERSITY: $75,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJCC ROCKLAND INC: $55,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetOLA OF EASTERN LONG ISLAND INC: $23,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetLIFE RECAPTURED INC: $20,000 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetCITYMEALS-ON-WHEELS: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CLAMSHELL FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 over 2y, 18% of budgetINSPIRATIONAL TRIATHLON RACING INTERNATIONAL CORP: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetAMERICAN COLLEGE OF DENTISTS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAmateur Astronomers Association: $6,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetSPRINGS FOOD PANTRY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCHRISTIAN C SANDERSON MUSEUM: $5,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetNEW YORK ACADEMY OF DENTISTRY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 6.7% of budgetASIAN AMERICANS FOR EQUALITY INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetARMENIAN CULTURAL & EDUCATIONAL CENTER INC: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTURTLE RESCUE OF THE HAMPTONS INC: $250 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

The New York Communit…Jewish Communal FundVanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The New York Community TrustNY14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The New York Community Trust · Jewish Communal Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Alice Rosenwald Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Alice Rosenwald Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    4get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Alice Rosenwald Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Alice Rosenwald Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 27 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Alice Rosenwald’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