· Private foundation
David M & Hope G Solinger Foundation
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.
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.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k30 grants · $85k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $110k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FEEDING AMERICA | $20,000 |
| COUNCIL OF PEOPLE ORGANIZATION | $20,000 |
| COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS | $10,000 |
| TECHNOSERVE | $10,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION | $10,000 |
| HEIFER INTERNATIONAL | $10,000 |
| FOOD BANK FOR NEW YORK CITY | $10,000 |
| SUN RIVER HEALTH FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| THE BOWERY MISSION | $10,000 |
| NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL | $8,000 |
| ENVIRONMENT DEFENSE FUND | $8,000 |
| ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION | $5,000 |
| THE FORTUNE SOCIETY | $5,000 |
| FLORENCE IMMGRATION & REFUGEE PROJECT | $5,000 |
| EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY | $5,000 |
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 (FY22–23, $54k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 94% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +55% since the first grant, against -41% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2023, 8 since wound down; 37 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, 12% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $171k 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
- WMWHITNEY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART6× · 2017–2022 · $15k · revenue +161%
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC2× · 2022–2023 · $10k · revenue +13%- CHChildren's Hospital Corporation2× · 2020–2021 · $6k · revenue +55%
Funded once
- NANATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATIONone grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -43%
NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INCone grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -41%- TBTHE BRIDGE FUND OF NEW YORK INCone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -62%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
We exist to end the abuse of animals raised for food. this mission is executed by persuading companies and institutions to adopt animal welfare policies through negotiation and pressure campaigns, and then holding them accountable to their…
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.
Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…
World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) is the only civil rights organization in The United States dedicated solely to securing fundamental rights for nonhuman animals and the leading force in building a national and global nonhuman rights…
To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
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 strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Legal Aid Society and the most unlike its peers is Rabbi Rm Goldstein Fund. 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 43 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.
45 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. 45 of the 53 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 COUNCIL OF PEOPLES ORGANIZATION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds WHITNEY MUSEUM OF AMERICAN ART ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds SUN RIVER HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC ↗
- Who funds TECHNOSERVE INC ↗
- Who funds THE BRIDGE FUND OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds Christian Herald Association Inc ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK FOR NEW YORK CITY ↗
- Who funds Museum of Modern Art ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Rabbi RM Goldstein Fund ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Corporation ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds HUDSON LINK FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN PRISON INC ↗
- Who funds A FUND INC ↗
- Who funds EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE FORTUNE SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S TUMOR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CITY HARVEST INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST ↗
- Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds The Fistula Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC ↗
- Who funds REFUGEE & IMMIGRANT CENTER FOR EDUCATION & LEGAL SERVICES ↗
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: Lynn Stern & Jeremy Lang Family Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 David M & Hope G Solinger 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.
- Children's Hospital Corporation — 10% 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 David M & Hope G Solinger Foundation?
Find your warmest path to David M & Hope G Solinger 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.