Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Janet and Steven Grebow Family Foundation

Its FY2019 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$909k
Granted FY2019
17
Grants FY2019
7
States reached
$897k
Largest
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 98% of JANET AND STEVEN GREBOW FAMILY FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2019 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k16 grants · $12k
  • $250k+1 grant · $897k
$1,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JANET AND STEVEN GREBOW GIVING FUND$896,500
JEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH CO$2,000
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES$1,900
PANCREATIC CANCER FOUNDATION$1,100
BETH SHALOM CONGREGATION$1,000
GIFT OF LIFE BONE MARROW$1,000
JEWISH ADOPTION & FOSTER CARE$1,000
GIFT OF HOPE$1,000
DANA FARBER CANCER CENTER$1,000
ALZHEIMERS ASSOCIATION$1,000
JDRF INTERNATIONAL$500
TEMPLE ISAIAH$200
THE SILVER ACADEMY HARRISBURG$100
SHRINERS HOSPITAL$100
PAPS CORP$100
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–19, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 55% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%JEWISH ADOPTION & FOSTER CARE: $4k → 13%JEWISH ADOPTION & FOSTER CARE: $1k → 13%RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE: $100 → 19%JEWISH ADOPTION & FOSTER CARE: $500 → 13%PLACE OF HOPE: $100 → 11%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $3k → 11%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $2k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

NY
MA
PA
KY
MD
KS
DC
FL

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

5%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$48k · 11 repeat orgs$908k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2019, 4 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
12

Total granted

$48k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+70%

Still filing today

36%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 1% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $900k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19
HealthHuman ServicesEducationOther

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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $7k · revenue +45%
  • JA
    Jewish Adoption and Foster Care Options Inc
    3× · 2017–2019 · $5k · revenue +44%
  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF GREATER ORLANDO INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $4k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • VF
    VOICES FOR AUTISM INC
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • LS
    LOWER SHORE SUPPORT SERVICES INC
    one grant, 2018 · $1k · revenue -37%
  • ES
    EBEN-EZER SDA CHURCH
    one grant, 2017 · $1k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Cystic Fibrosis Foundation

To cure cf and provide all people with cf the opportunity to lead long, fulfilling lives by funding research and drug development, partnering with the cf community, and advancing high-quality, specialized care.

Health
2
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
3
Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation Inc

Our mission is to expand scientific knowledge and improve public health by designing and conducting world-class clinical trials and epidemiologic research.

Unclassified
4
Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital Inc

Mission: johns hopkins all children's hospital (all children's), a member of johns hopkins medicine, strives to provide the highest quality care to improve the health of our entire community through innovation, collaboration, service…

Health
5
The Johns Hopkins Hospital

For more than 125 years, the mission of the johns hopkins hospital has been to lead the world in the diagnosis and treatment of disease and to train tomorrow's great physicians, nurses and scientists. above all, we aim to provide the…

Health
6
Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network Inc

The mission of Dana-Farber Cancer Care Network (DFCCN) is to promote and support, directly or indirectly, the interests and purposes of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI).

Health
7
American Society of Clinical Oncology Inc

See schedule o:asco is a professional oncology society committed to conquering cancer through research, education, and promotion of the highest quality patient care.

Health
8
Jgs Administrative Services Inc

To provide administrative support to jgs lifecare corporation.

Health
9
The Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation

The jonsson cancer center foundation is the single most important vehicle for raising private funds for cancer research at ucla and plays a key role in advancing cancer treatments and care. please see schedule o for additional information.

10
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

11
Shands Jacksonville Healthcare Inc

As a part of UF Health, the organization's mission is to promote health through outstanding and high-quality patient care, innovative and rigorous education in the health professions and biomedical sciences, and high-impact research across…

Health
12
Lifebridge Health Inc

Lifebridge health is dedicated to maintaining and improving the health and well-being of all people in greater baltimore, with special emphasis on baltimore city and baltimore and carroll counties. in so doing, lifebridge is committed to…

Health

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 Lower Shore Support Services Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

15 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 34 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

JANET AND STEVEN GREBOW GIVING FUND — $896,500 · OtherJANET AND STEVEN GREBOW GIVING FUND+21 more — $41,600 · OtherJewish Adoption and Foster Care Options Inc — $5,336 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF GREATER ORLANDO INC — $4,400 · Human Services+3 more — $300 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND FOUNDATION INC — $7,000 · EducationJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC — $4,000 · PhilanthropyDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — $1,000 · HealthDOLPHINS CYCLING CHALLENGE INC — $500 · HealthBREAKTHROUGH T1D — $500 · HealthAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC — $200 · HealthSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN — $100 · Health
Other$938,100Human Services$10,036Education$7,000Philanthropy$4,000Health$2,300

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetUNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND FOUNDATION INC — $7,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJewish Adoption and Foster Care Options Inc — $5,336 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICES OF GREATER ORLANDO INC — $4,400 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY INC — $4,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF HOWARD COUNTY — $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLOWER SHORE SUPPORT SERVICES INC — $1,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDOLPHINS CYCLING CHALLENGE INC — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC — $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBRIDGINGLIFE INC — $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLACE OF HOPE INC — $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC — $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN — $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

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.

T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving IncMD14.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Janet and Steven Grebow 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 0%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc7% of income from government
  • University of Maryland Foundation Inc0% of income from government
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc0% of income from government
  • Place of Hope Inc0% of income from government
  • Shriners Hospitals for Children0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 34 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph