· Private foundation
Fanny & Stephen Rosenak 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k11 grants · $35k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $123k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $105k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SHARE OUR STRENGTH | $105,000 |
| MEALS ON WHEELS | $35,000 |
| AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY | $35,000 |
| BAPTIST HEALTH SO FLORIDA FOUNDAT | $33,000 |
| NPR | $10,000 |
| THE HUMANE SOCIETY | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| NPR | $5,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS USA | $5,000 |
| SMILE TRAIN | $5,000 |
| PI KAPPA PHI FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $3,000 |
| FOR PETE SAKE RESCUE | $3,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $1,000 |
| THE SALVATION ARMY | $1,000 |
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 (FY17–21, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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 +41% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k 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
- HWHumane World for Animals Inc6× · 2019–2024 · $50k · revenue +31%
- PKPI KAPPA PHI FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $40k · revenue +164%
- DCDOLPHINS CYCLING CHALLENGE INC7× · 2017–2023 · $21k · revenue +104%
Funded once
- WCWORLD CENTER KITCHEN INCone grant, 2022 · $50k
- IRInternational Rescue Committee INCone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -2%
- ESEASTER SEALSone grant, 2018 · $25k
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)
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
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;…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
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…
The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."
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…
Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened. panthera develops, implements and oversees wild cat conservation strategies on a global scale.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
To increase and diffuse geographic knowledge in the broadest sense, using the power of science, exploration, education and storytelling to illuminate and protect the wonder of the world.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sheppard and Enoch Pratt Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Actors' Playhouse Productions Inc. 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 41 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.
37 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. 37 of the 55 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 SHARE OUR STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds Humane World for Animals Inc ↗
- Who funds PI KAPPA PHI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MORTIMER AND MIMI LEVITT FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds DOLPHINS CYCLING CHALLENGE INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds STREET LAW INC ↗
- Who funds VASSAR COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON AREA WOMEN'S FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
- Who funds Southern Methodist University ↗
- Who funds SIBLEY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ZOO MIAMI FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds RANSOM EVERGLADES SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTER CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds TRINITY COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS FOR OXFORD INC ↗
- Who funds DADE HERITAGE TRUST 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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Dunspaugh Dalton Foundation Inc · The Batchelor Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Fanny & Stephen Rosenak 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- University of Miami — 5% of income from government
- Trinity College — 0% of income from government
- Zoo Miami Foundation 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.