Skip to content
Bernice and Milton Stern Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Bernice and Milton Stern Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$6.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$1.5M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Philanthropy$7.7MEducation$2.4MHuman Services$492kInternational$395kYouth Development$240kArts & Culture$115kPublic Benefit$10kCrime & Legal$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+4 grants · $6.0M
$1,488,642
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PESKY FAMILY FOUNDATION$1,501,142
THE ROBERT STERN FAMILY FOUNDATION$1,488,642
THE MORRIS & BESSIE ALTMAN FOUNDATION$1,488,642
THE BIG WOOD FOUNDATION$1,488,641
BIRD ON A CLIFF THEATRE COMPANY$10,000
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 (FY17–22, $392k) land where the poverty rate runs at 26%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER: $71k → 28%KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER: $71k → 28%KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER: $50k → 28%KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER: $50k → 28%KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER: $50k → 28%KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER: $25k → 28%LENOX HILL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE: $5k → 17%THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY: $45k → 17%THE CHILDRENS AID SOCIETY: $25k → 17%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

VT
NH
ID
NY
MA
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$11M · 15 repeat orgs$86k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +41% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
9

Total granted

$11M
$86k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+19%

Still filing today

73%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationPhilanthropyHealthYouth DevelopmentPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • SC
    STERN CENTER FOR LANGUAGE AND LEARNING
    7× · 2017–2023 · $1.3M · revenue +41%
  • KH
    KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $317k · revenue +56%
  • NS
    NYC SALT INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $240k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • BC
    BRONX CHARTER SCHOOL
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • FH
    FACING HISTORY & OURSELVES INC
    one grant, 2019 · $20k · revenue +15%
  • TS
    THE SUN VALLEY FOR THE ARTS
    one grant, 2020 · $15k
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
The Steinman Foundation
—
2
The Goldman Sachs Foundation
Philanthropy
3
The Columbia Foundation
Philanthropy
4
The Diane Stilwell Weinberg Foundation
Human Services
5
Wexner Foundation
—
6
The Lichtenstein Family Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Kenneth & Nira Abramowitz Foundation
Philanthropy
8
The Stotsenberg Foundation
—
9
The Goldenberg Family Foundation
Philanthropy
10
The Charles R Bronfman Prize Foundation
Philanthropy
11
Abraham and Lillian Rosenberg Foundation
—
12
The Alexander Schneider Foundation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Excellence Community Schools Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Big Wood Foundation. 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

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 26 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE ROBERT STERN FAMILY FOUNDATION: $2,188,642 · OtherTHE ROBERT STERN FAMILY FOUNDATIONTHE BIG WOOD FOUNDATION: $2,088,641 · OtherTHE BIG WOOD FOUNDATIONThe Morris & Bessie Altman Foundation: $1,538,642 · OtherThe Morris & Bessie Altman FoundationLEE DAVID PESKY CENTER FOR LEARNING ENRICHMENT: $910,000 · OtherLEE DAVID PESKY CENTER FOR LEARNING ENRICHMENT+10 more: $296,200 · OtherThe Pensky Family Foundation: $1,901,142 · PhilanthropyThe Pensky Family F…+1 more: $10,000 · PhilanthropySTERN CENTER FOR LANGUAGE AND LEARNING: $1,260,000 · HealthSTERN CENTER…KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $316,500 · Human ServicesTHE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $70,000 · Human Services+1 more: $5,000 · Human ServicesFRIENDS WITHOUT A BORDER: $200,000 · EducationEXCELLENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS INC: $75,000 · EducationTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $40,000 · EducationNYC SALT INC: $240,000 · Youth DevelopmentTEAM RUBICON INC: $195,000 · Public Safety & DisasterFACING HISTORY & OURSELVES INC: $20,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$7,022,125Philanthropy$1,911,142Health$1,260,000Human Services$391,500Education$315,000Youth Development$240,000Public Safety & Disaster$195,000Arts & Culture$20,000

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 budgetTHE ROBERT STERN FAMILY FOUNDATION: $2,188,642 over 4y, 62% of budgetTHE BIG WOOD FOUNDATION: $2,088,641 over 4y, 38% of budgetThe Pensky Family Foundation: $1,901,142 over 4y, 55% of budgetThe Morris & Bessie Altman Foundation: $1,538,642 over 2y, 64% of budgetSTERN CENTER FOR LANGUAGE AND LEARNING: $1,260,000 over 7y, 5.5% of budgetKINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $316,500 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetNYC SALT INC: $240,000 over 4y, 12% of budgetFRIENDS WITHOUT A BORDER: $200,000 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetTEAM RUBICON INC: $195,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetEXCELLENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS INC: $75,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $70,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK: $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFACING HISTORY & OURSELVES INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLENOX HILL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds THE ROBERT STERN FAMILY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE BIG WOOD FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds The Pensky Family Foundation ↗
  • Who funds The Morris & Bessie Altman Foundation ↗
  • Who funds STERN CENTER FOR LANGUAGE AND LEARNING ↗
  • Who funds KINGSBRIDGE HEIGHTS COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds NYC SALT INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS WITHOUT A BORDER ↗
  • Who funds TEAM RUBICON INC ↗
  • Who funds EXCELLENCE COMMUNITY SCHOOLS INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
  • Who funds FACING HISTORY & OURSELVES INC ↗
  • Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LENOX HILL NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC ↗

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 Big Wood Foundati…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Big Wood FoundationNY13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Big Wood Foundation · 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 Bernice and Milton Stern Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bernice and Milton Stern Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Stern Center for Language and Learning: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 Bernice and Milton Stern Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Bernice and Milton Stern 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.

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 26 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bernice and Milton Stern’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