· Private foundation
Jack and Inez Lippes Family Foundation
Its FY2023 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 FY2018–2022.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF BUFFALO FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| WJCT INC | $500 |
| ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE | $500 |
| WORLD JEWISH CONGRESS AMERICAN | $460 |
| SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER | $300 |
| CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS | $300 |
| BUFFALO JEWISH FEDERATION | $300 |
| CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS | $300 |
| LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS | $300 |
| AMERICANS UNITED FOR LIFE | $200 |
| FEMINST MAJORITY FOUNDATION | $200 |
| FEMINST MAJORITY FOUNDATION | $200 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $200 |
| AMERICAN DIABETES ASSOCIATION | $200 |
| BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE | $200 |
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 (FY19–19, $150) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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.
20 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2022, 5 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
- UAUniversity at Buffalo Foundation Inc5× · 2018–2022 · $5k · revenue +67%
- ALANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE5× · 2018–2022 · $2k · revenue +80%
- WIWJCT INC5× · 2018–2022 · $2k · revenue +73%
Funded once
- JSJACOBS SCHOOL OF MEDICINEone grant, 2018 · $1k
- JSJACKSONVILLE SYMPHONYone grant, 2018 · $200
- AUAMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATEgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $200 · revenue +74%
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.
The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
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…
Women's law project creates a more just and equitable society by advancing the rights and status of all women throughout their lives. to this end, we engage in high-impact litigation, advocacy, and education. the core values of women's law…
The federation for american immigration reform's (fair) mission is to educate the public about the economic, sociological, environmental, demographic and other effects of mass immigration to the united states.
The committee to protect journalists promotes press freedom worldwide and defends the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal. cpj ensures the free flow of news and commentary by taking action wherever…
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;…
The organization's mission is to engage in non partisan analysis of u.s. foreign policy in the middle east, with special emphasis on the middle east peace process, and to present policymakers in the united states, in the region and in the…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Free press action fund fights for your rights to connect and communicate. we fight to save the free and open internet, curb runaway media consolidation, protect press freedom, and promote digital civil rights. we believe that change…
The auschwitz institute for the prevention of genocide and mass atrocities is dedicated to building a world that prevents genocide. we aim to see every state effectively integrate within government the domestically developed function of…
The middle east media research institute (memri) explores the middle east through its media, providing timely translations from arabic, farsi, urdu, pashtu, and turkish media and publishing original analysis of political, ideological,…
Interfaith alliance is a growing network of people of diverse faiths and beliefs across the country working together to build a resilient democracy and fulfill america's promise of religious freedom and civil rights not just for some, but…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is People for the American Way and the most unlike its peers is Dana-Farber Cancer Institute 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 42 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.
30 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. 30 of the 48 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 University at Buffalo Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds WJCT INC ↗
- Who funds Jewish Federation Of Greater Buffalo Inc ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ↗
- Who funds Americans United for Life Inc ↗
- Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
- Who funds PATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds Holocaust Resource Center of BuffaloInc ↗
- Who funds American Diabetes Association ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICANS UNITED FOR SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE ↗
- Who funds WORLD JEWISH CONGRESS (AMERICAN SECTION) INC ↗
- Who funds COMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING IN AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
- Who funds Unitarian Universalist Service Committee Inc ↗
- Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF GREATER BUFFALO INC ↗
- Who funds POPULATION CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTFOCUS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds UNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
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: American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Jack and Inez Lippes 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Florida Sheriffs Association Inc — 4% 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.