· Private foundation
Irvin Stern Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $11k
- $10k–50k29 grants · $615k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FIGUEROA WU FAMILY FOUNDATION | $40,000 |
| BAY AREA HYBRID COLLEGE INITIATIVE | $30,000 |
| BONADFIDE INC | $30,000 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF LATET HUMANITARIAN AID INC | $30,000 |
| HOUSING PLUS | $30,000 |
| INGLOBAL | $30,000 |
| JEWISH FEDERATION OF SOUTH PALM BEACH COUNTY | $30,000 |
| BROOKLYN BOATWORKS | $30,000 |
| AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE | $25,000 |
| PAPER FIG FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| ANN AND ROBERT H LURIE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL | $25,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN -JEWISH LIFE & ANTISEMITISM | $25,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN | $25,000 |
| ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE | $25,000 |
| INSIDE OUT NETWORK | $25,000 |
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 (FY20–25, $303k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 82% 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 +51% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
53 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 40 since wound down; 17 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, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $341k 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
- JUJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO5× · 2020–2024 · $480k · revenue +13%
- MFMILAGRO FOUNDATION INC5× · 2020–2024 · $200k · revenue +51%
- NHNOURISHING HOPE5× · 2020–2024 · $170k · revenue +107%
Funded once
- TDTHORN DIGITAL DEFENDERS OF CHILDRENone grant, 2020 · $30k
- BCBRADY CENTER FOR GUN VIOLENCEone grant, 2021 · $30k
- HOHAVEN OF HOPEone grant, 2022 · $30k
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 develop, strengthen, and learn from nonprofit, philanthropic, public, as well as other projects, organizations, and networks that benefit society by advancing civic engagement, community-building, culture, education, religion, service,…
To inspire and prepare young people to succeed in a global economy
The opportunity network ignites the drive, curiosity, and agency of underrepresented students on their paths to and through college and into thriving careers, powered by our commitment to access and community.
To promote dietary changes to build a healthy, equitable, humane, and environmentally-sustainable food system.
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.
The Jews of Color Initiatives mission is to advance racial equity in the U.S. Jewish community by centering the leadership of Jews of Color and ensuring that our communities and institutions reflect the multiracial reality of the Jewish…
Avodah develops lifelong social justice leaders whose work is informed by jewish values and who inspire the jewish community to work toward a more just and equitable world.
To organize pro-israel, pro-peace, pro-democracy americans to promote us policies that embody our deeply held jewish and democratic values and that help secure the state of israel as a democratic homeland for the jewish people.
Upwardly global removes employment barriers for immigrant, refugee, and asylee professionals while advancing the inclusion of their skills into the u.s. economy.
To realize a more equitable and inclusive economy by advancing innovative workforce solutions that equip local residents with the skills and resources to access high-growth employment opportunities in tech and other rapidly growing fields…
Ijc's mission is to recruit, train, and populate the immigration field with the highest quality legal advocates to create a new generation of leaders with a lifelong commitment to immigrant justice.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Federation of Palm Beach County Inc and the most unlike its peers is Hanley Foundation. 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 24 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) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
72 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. 72 of the 131 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 JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds MILAGRO FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NOURISHING HOPE ↗
- Who funds ROOT & REBOUND ↗
- Who funds University of Michigan ↗
- Who funds Bay Area Hybrid College Initiative DBA Rivet School ↗
- Who funds BROOKLYN BOATWORKS INC ↗
- Who funds Housing Plus Solutions Inc ↗
- Who funds PROJECT MOST INC ↗
- Who funds Inside Out Network Inc ↗
- Who funds WOMEN IN NEED INC ↗
- Who funds EVANSTON SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds MIDWEST ACCESS COALITION ↗
- Who funds UNITE AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds Pediatric Brain Tumor Foundation of the United States Inc ↗
- Who funds WE EVANSTON ↗
- Who funds PILOT LIGHT ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF SOUTH PALM BEACH COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds INNER-CITY COMPUTER STARS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FIGUEROA WU FAMILY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Prison Yoga Project Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗
- Who funds Boys Town Nevada Inc ↗
- Who funds URBAN ALCHEMY ↗
- Who funds BONAFIDE 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: The Chicago Community Trust · Jewish Communal Fund · Helen V Brach Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Circle of Service Foundation · Tides Foundation · The Hyde and Watson Foundation · The James Irvine 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 Irvin Stern 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.
- Out in the Open Inc — 25% of income from government
- Boca Ballet Theatre Company — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Irvin Stern Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Irvin 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.