· Private foundation
Edward & Verna Gerbic Family 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k59 grants · $164k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $232k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| American Indian College Fund | $27,000 |
| Doctors Without Borders USA Inc | $20,000 |
| UNICEF USA | $15,000 |
| Natural Resources Defense Council Inc | $15,000 |
| Human Rights Watch Inc | $15,000 |
| Southern Poverty Law Center Inc | $15,000 |
| World Central Kitchen Inc | $15,000 |
| Holy Name Foundation Inc | $10,000 |
| Equal Justice Initiative | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| Point Foundation | $10,000 |
| GM Ewing Forum (Finger Lakes Community College) | $10,000 |
| Friends of Ganondagan Inc | $10,000 |
| Finger Lakes Land Trust | $10,000 |
| Hillside Children's Center | $10,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $204k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% 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 +45% since the first grant, against +38% for the ones you funded once.
106 repeat relationships — 72 still active in FY2025, 34 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- USUC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION3× · 2017–2024 · $575k · revenue +78%
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC7× · 2017–2025 · $155k · revenue +98%
UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF7× · 2017–2025 · $130k · revenue +76%
Funded once
- SDSan Diego State University Research Foundation (KPBS Public Media)one grant, 2021 · $215k
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION SDSU RESEARCH FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $215k · revenue +39%- HPHealth Promiseone grant, 2023 · $10k
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.
To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
Our mission is to invest in and accelerate the development of the most promising future leaders in biomedical research with global impact.
Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.
The Fossey Fund is dedicated to the conservation and study of gorillas in Africa through a successful, people-centered approach: 1) Providing daily protection to gorillas, 2) Scientific research providing critical data on gorillas and…
Ifac acts in the public interest and has no profit-making purpose. ifac serves the public interest by: speaking out and engaging as the voice for the global profession; leading and developing a future-ready accountancy profession; and…
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Human Rights Watch Inc and the most unlike its peers is Edgewater Artists in Motion. 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 37 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) — 2% 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.
96 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. 96 of the 149 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 UC SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION SDSU RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND ↗
- Who funds The Finger Lakes Land Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds Hospeace House Inc ↗
- Who funds CRUDEM FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds HILLSIDE CHILDREN'S CENTER ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF GANONDAGAN INC ↗
- Who funds Mercy Ships International ↗
- Who funds POINT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds Rochester Folk Art Guild Inc ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FOODLINK INC ↗
- Who funds YATES COUNTY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds CAMP GOOD DAYS AND SPECIAL TIMES INC ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Middlebury College ↗
- Who funds InterVol Inc ↗
- Who funds The Children's Agenda Inc ↗
- Who funds BRADY CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE ↗
- Who funds MARICOPA COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT FOUNDATION ↗
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: Rochester Area Community Foundation · United Way of Greater Rochester and the Finger Lakes Inc · Max and Marian Farash Charitable Foundation · Greater Rochester Health Foundation · Rochester Area Community Foundation Depository Inc · Paychex Charitable Foundation Inc · Esl Charitable Foundation · Finger Lakes Area Community Endowment · William & Sheila Konar Foundation · Community Foundation for Greater Buffalo Inc · Joe and Sue Degeorge Foundation · The Louise and Henry Epstein Family Foundation Inc
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 Edward & Verna Gerbic 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.
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Mote Marine Laboratory Inc — 4% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Middlebury College — 1% 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 Edward & Verna Gerbic Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Edward & Verna Gerbic 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.