· Private foundation
Barsky Family Foundation
Its FY2023 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 FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MISHKAN HA'AM | $250 |
| THE FRESH AIR FUND | $100 |
| DUKE UNIVERSITY | $100 |
| COLUMBIA SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK | $100 |
| THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS EDUCATION FUN | $100 |
| THE NEW ISRAEL FUND | $100 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF AMERICA | $75 |
| THIRTEEN | $75 |
| LEUKEMIA AND LYMPHOMA SOCIETY | $75 |
| SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER | $50 |
| FRIENDS OF OLD CROTON ACQUEDUCT | $50 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $50 |
| HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION | $50 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $40 |
| UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS | $40 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 63% of your 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 +42% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
43 repeat relationships — 34 still active in FY2023, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (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 FY2023, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100 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
DUKE UNIVERSITY7× · 2017–2023 · $750 · revenue +51%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC7× · 2017–2023 · $565 · revenue +12%- BCBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC7× · 2017–2023 · $525 · revenue +4%
Funded once
MIDWEST ATHLETES AGAINST CHILDHOOD CANCER INCone grant, 2021 · $200 · revenue -23%- MSMEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENone grant, 2017 · $200
K9S FOR WARRIORS INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $200 · revenue +138%
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
2025 was a turbulent year for the medical and health research community, but our commitment to advocating for science never wavered. from pushing back against funding threats to elevating researchers' voices and equipping advocates, we…
Darksky international restores the nighttime environment and protects communities from the harmful effects of light pollution through outreach, advocacy, and conservation.
To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
The climate institute is organized for the purpose of educating the general public and policy makers as to the gravity of potential climate change, exploring the policy implications of the latest scientific findings on climate modelling…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Old Croton Aqueduct. 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 49 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 52 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 DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds FRESH AIR FUND ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds TECHNOSERVE INC ↗
- Who funds HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE OLD CROTON AQUEDUCT ↗
- Who funds MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds SIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
- Who funds ACCION INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds Disabled American Veterans ↗
- Who funds MIDWEST ATHLETES AGAINST CHILDHOOD CANCER INC ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds K9S FOR WARRIORS INC ↗
- Who funds Scenic Hudson Inc ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Hastings Volunteer Fire Company ↗
- Who funds THE FORTUNE SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds RAILS TO TRAILS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds HASTINGS HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Amazonsmile 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 Barsky 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.
- Oxfam-America Inc — 0% of income from government
- K9S for Warriors 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Barsky Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Barsky Family Foundation 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.