· Private foundation
Benjamin & Sara Greenspan Fund
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 72% of BENJAMIN & SARA GREENSPAN FUND’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| INST FOR COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP | $2,000 |
| SAFARI WEST FOUNDATION | $1,900 |
| CANAL ALLIANCE | $1,750 |
| SF MARIN FOOD BANK | $1,500 |
| PROJECT MORE | $1,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,350 |
| ANTI DEFAMATION LEAGUE | $1,000 |
| DESTINY ARTS CENTER | $1,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $750 |
| Individual grant recipient | $750 |
| ABORTION CARE NETWORK | $750 |
| CENTER FOR REPRO RIGHTS | $750 |
| MARINE MAMMAL SOCIETY | $500 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERV SOCIETY | $500 |
| INTL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
29 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- IFINSTITUTE FOR COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP9× · 2017–2025 · $27k · revenue +64%
- WFWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL4× · 2017–2020 · $12k · revenue +41%
- SFSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK5× · 2020–2025 · $9k · revenue +10%
Funded once
- SFSAN FRANCISCO PARKS ALLIANCEone grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue -39%
- NNYUone grant, 2017 · $6k
- ACAMAMEDA CO COMM FOOD BANKone grant, 2020 · $2k
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)
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.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
Rri's mission is to support local communities and indigenous peoples' struggles against poverty and marginalization by promoting greater global commitment and action towards policy, market, and legal reforms that secure their rights to…
To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.
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;…
The international institute on race, equality and human rights contributes to the promotion and defense of human rights, through training, technical assistance, advocacy, and strategic litigation conducted at the regional and international…
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
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.
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is People for the American Way and the most unlike its peers is The Tank Ltd. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
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) — 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 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.
22 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. 22 of the 41 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 INSTITUTE FOR COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP ↗
- Who funds WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO PARKS ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds CANAL ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds GUATEMALA UNITED FOR ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds ABORTION CARE NETWORK ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds TIPPING POINT COMMUNITY ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE TANK LTD ↗
- Who funds Destiny Arts Center ↗
- Who funds Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE BRANSON SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL 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 Benjamin & Sara Greenspan Fund 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.
- The Shriners' Hospital for Children — 6% 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.