Skip to content
Jeff and Marieke Rothschild Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Jeff and Marieke Rothschild 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.

$29M
Granted FY2024still arriving
18
Grants FY2024still arriving
9
States reached
$5.5M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$21MEnvironment$13MHealth$12MEducation$10MInternational$6.6MArts & Culture$5.0MPhilanthropy$5.0MCrime & Legal$1.0MOther$0
02FY2024 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $250k
  • $250k+16 grants · $29M
$1,000,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$428M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY$5,500,000
PRESIDENT & TRUSTEES OF COLBY COLLEGE$5,000,000
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION$5,000,000
REWILD$2,500,000
NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST$2,000,000
FOOD FOR EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC$1,600,000
AVINA AMERICAS INC$1,000,000
RAINBOW WORLD FUND$1,000,000
CLEAN SLATE INITIATIVE INC$1,000,000
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC$1,000,000
LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY$1,000,000
EVERY CURE INC$1,000,000
GREAT BARRIER REEF FOUNDATION USA INC$500,000
LIFESPAN EXTENSION ADVOCACY FOUNDATION INC$263,000
NP2$250,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 57% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $2.0M → 7%FIAT LUX FOUNDATION: $200k → 8%NP2: $250k → 8%SAN FRANCISCO OPERA ASSOCIATION: $5.0M → 10%NEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC: $250k → 12%LIFE LAB SCIENCE PROGRAM: $1.0M → 13%LIFESPAN EXTENSION ADVOCACY FOUNDATION INC: $263k → 6%FOOD FOR EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $1.6M → 17%MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER: $250k → 28%AVINA AMERICAS INC: $1.0M → 14%CLEAN SLATE INITIATIVE INC: $1.0M → 13%THE AMERICAS HEPATO-PANCREATO-BILIARY FOUNDATION INC: $182k → 5%THE WILD FOUNDATION: $325k → 12%INKOMOKO: $100k → 7%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $285k → 15%PRESIDENT & TRUSTEES OF COLBY COLLEGE: $5.0M → 12%NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $2.0M → 7%FIAT LUX FOUNDATION: $125k → 8%NP2: $200k → 8%RAINBOW WORLD FUND: $1.5M → 10%LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY: $8.1M → 13%EVERY CURE INC: $1.0M → 17%NEW VENTURE FUND: $1.0M → 14%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $250k → 15%SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $7.1M → 8%RAINBOW WORLD FUND: $1.0M → 10%LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY: $1.0M → 13%GREAT BARRIER REEF FOUNDATION USA INC: $500k → 14%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $200k → 15%SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $5.5M → 8%LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY: $102k → 13%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $200k → 15%SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $5.5M → 8%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $200k → 15%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $197k → 15%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $150k → 15%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $90k → 15%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $75k → 15%KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION: $40k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

ME
WA
NY
PA
CA
CO
KY
KS
TN
DC
TX
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$44M · 9 repeat orgs$25M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +8% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
7

Total granted

$44M
$12M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+1%

Still filing today

89%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 52% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13M went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationEnvironmentInternationalHealthFood & NutritionArts & CultureOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • LT
    LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
    3× · 2021–2024 · $9.2M · revenue +310% · 59% of their budget
  • KK
    KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $1.7M · revenue +170% · 98% of their budget
  • SC
    Santa Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship
    2× · 2022–2023 · $500k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • SF
    SAN FRANCISCO OPERA ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2023 · $5.0M · revenue -3%
  • Vanderbilt University
    one grant, 2023 · $5.0M · revenue +24%
  • LL
    Life Lab Science Program
    one grant, 2023 · $1.0M · revenue -42%
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
2
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
3
Uc Santa Barbara Foundation

The uc santa barbara foundation actively works to further the goals of the university of california, santa barbara. the foundation seeks to maintain and nurture the university's quality and distinction. on behalf of the campus, the…

Education
4
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
5
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
6
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
7
Future 500

See attached statementprimary missionfuture 500 builds trust between corporations, advocates, investors, and philanthropists to advance business as a force for good. we are experts in stakeholder engagement with over 25 years of experience…

—
8
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
9
The Uc Davis Foundation

The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.

Education
10
Ucla Foundation

The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…

Education
11
Ffwd

FFWD accelerates the growth of technology nonprofits by providing financial and human capital to help scale technology solutions for education, environmental, health, and human rights issues.

Philanthropy
12
Food & Water Watch

Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Venture Fund; the most unlike its peers is San Francisco Opera Association. 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

26 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 26 of the 27 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

7
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/26
Grantees still filing
12/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $10,150,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCI…Vanderbilt University: $5,000,000 · EducationVanderbilt UniversityThe President and Trustees of Colby College: $5,000,000 · EducationThe President and Trustees of Colby…KENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION INC: $1,686,866 · EducationKENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION INCLife Lab Science Program: $1,000,000 · Education+1 more: $182,400 · EducationSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $18,100,000 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALL…FOOD FOR EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $1,600,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD FOR EDUCATION FOUNDATION …LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY: $9,216,381 · EnvironmentLAND TRUST OF SAN…NEW VENTURE FUND: $1,000,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUNDGreat Barrier Reef Foundation USA Inc: $500,000 · EnvironmentSanta Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship: $500,000 · Environment+1 more: $250,000 · EnvironmentSAN FRANCISCO OPERA ASSOCIATION: $5,000,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $4,000,000 · PhilanthropyREWILD: $2,500,000 · AnimalsRainbow World Fund: $2,500,000 · Public Safety & DisasterHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $1,400,000 · OtherHUMAN RIG…AVINA AMERICAS INC: $1,000,000 · OtherAVINA AME…EVERY CURE INC: $1,000,000 · OtherEVERY CUR…LIFESPAN EXTENSION ADVOCACY FOUNDATION: $263,000 · OtherMONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER: $250,000 · OtherNP2: $450,000 · OtherNP2FIAT LUX FOUNDATION: $325,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL WILDERNESS LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION INC: $325,000 · OtherCLEAN SLATE INITIATIVE INC: $1,000,000 · OtherCLEAN SLA…+1 more: $100,000 · Other
Education$23,019,266Food & Nutrition$19,700,000Environment$11,466,381Arts & Culture$5,000,000Philanthropy$4,000,000Animals$2,500,000Public Safety & Disaster$2,500,000Other$6,113,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $18,100,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $10,150,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetLAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY: $9,216,381 over 3y, 59% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO OPERA ASSOCIATION: $5,000,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetVanderbilt University: $5,000,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe President and Trustees of Colby College: $5,000,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $4,000,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetREWILD: $2,500,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetRainbow World Fund: $2,500,000 over 2y, 90% of budgetKENYAN KIDS FOUNDATION INC: $1,686,866 over 5y, 98% of budgetFOOD FOR EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $1,600,000 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $1,400,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetLife Lab Science Program: $1,000,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetAVINA AMERICAS INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $1,000,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEVERY CURE INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetCLEAN SLATE INITIATIVE INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 9.9% of budgetGreat Barrier Reef Foundation USA Inc: $500,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetSanta Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship: $500,000 over 2y, 9.3% of budgetFIAT LUX FOUNDATION: $325,000 over 2y, 54% of budgetINTERNATIONAL WILDERNESS LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION INC: $325,000 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetLIFESPAN EXTENSION ADVOCACY FOUNDATION: $263,000 over 1y, 34% of budgetNEXTGEN CLIMATE AMERICA INC: $250,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetMONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER: $250,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Foundation: $182,400 over 1y, 57% of budgetINKOMOKO: $100,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Silicon Valley Commun…National Philanthropi…Gs Donor Advised Phil…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA17.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Jeff and Marieke Rothschild Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jeff and Marieke Rothschild Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Jeff and Marieke Rothschild Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Jeff and Marieke Rothschild 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 27 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its 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.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Jeff and Marieke Rothschild’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home