Skip to content
Jeffrey and Jane Greenspun Gale at a glance

· Private foundation

Jeffrey and Jane Greenspun Gale

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$127k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$27k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Environment$1.2MReligion$136kAnimals$110kPhilanthropy$79kHealth$24kArts & Culture$12kFood & Nutrition$1kCivil Rights$500Other$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $122k
$20,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$39k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CONGREGATION NER TAMID$27,000
CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL$25,000
SPRINGS PRESERVE$25,000
ANIMAL FOUNDATION$20,000
JEWISH NEVADA$15,000
SAVE THE CHIMPS$10,000
CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION$5,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–22, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 83% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SPUR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $500 → 7%NATHAN ADELSON HOSPICE: $3k → 13%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.
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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 6 repeat orgs$55k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +42% since the first grant, against -17% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
9

Total granted

$1.4M
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
-17%

Still filing today

67%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentAnimalsHuman ServicesFood & NutritionCivil RightsArts & 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

  • CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION
    6× · 2020–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +94%
  • TA
    THE ANIMAL FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2025 · $100k · revenue +28%
  • GO
    GREEN OUR PLANET
    2× · 2021–2023 · $25k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • SJ
    ST JUDES
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • KM
    KEEP MEMORY ALIVE
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • TS
    The Smith Center for the Performing Artsgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $9k · revenue +249%
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
Sierra Nevada Alliance

To protect and restore sierra lands, water, wildlife and rural communities. to engage and support efforts to adopt exemplary local sustainable community actions accross the sierra nevada that balance social, economic and environmental…

Environment
2
Nevada Humane Society

To care for pets, find them homes and save lives.

Animals
3
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
4
Nevada Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Nevada spca saves the lives of southern nevada's most vulnerable pets, inspires human companions to uphold the best possible care and increases the human-animal bond through adoption, foster and preventative care.

Animals
5
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
6
Nevada Agricultural Foundation
Food & Nutrition
7
Nevada Wildlife Federation

The Nevada Wildlife Federation is the Oldest 501(c)(3) statewide conservation organization dedicated to sustaining Nevada's wildlife through conservation and education.

Animals
8
Sierra Watch

Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.

Environment
9
Nevada Community Foundation Inc

Our mission is to steward our donors' charitable giving, now and for generations to come and to provide leadership, vision and impactful community investment for southern nevada.

Philanthropy
10
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
11
Nevada State Parks Foundation

The nevada state parks foundation is dedicated to enhancing and preserving the natural beauty, cultural heritage and recreational opportunities within the nevada division of state parks. the foundation is committed to supporting the…

Environment
12
Nevada Land Trust

To preserve and protect the special places and open spaces of nevada for future generations.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Smith Center for the Performing Arts; the most unlike its peers is Conservation International Foundation. 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

12 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. 12 of the 19 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $1,050,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATIONSPRINGS PRESERVE FOUNDATION: $100,000 · EnvironmentSPRINGS PRESERVE FOUNDATION+1 more: $25,000 · EnvironmentCONGREGATION NER TAMID: $126,000 · OtherCONGREGATION NER …JEWISH FEDERATION OF LAS VEGAS SIGESMUND CENTER: $78,800 · OtherJEWISH FEDERATION…ST JUDES: $10,000 · OtherKEEP MEMORY ALIVE: $10,000 · Other+4 more: $14,700 · Other+4 moreTHE ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $100,000 · AnimalsSAVE THE CHIMPS INC: $10,000 · AnimalsThe Smith Center for the Performing Arts: $8,564 · Arts & CultureNathan Adelson Hospice Inc: $2,500 · Human ServicesSPUR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $500 · Human ServicesTHREE SQUARE: $1,000 · Food & NutritionNEW DIRECTIONS FOR WOMEN INC: $1,000 · HealthCASA OF LOS ANGELES: $500 · Civil Rights
Environment$1,175,000Other$239,500Animals$110,000Arts & Culture$8,564Human Services$3,000Food & Nutrition$1,000Health$1,000Civil Rights$500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION: $1,050,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetSPRINGS PRESERVE FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 4y, 4.4% of budgetTHE ANIMAL FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF LAS VEGAS SIGESMUND CENTER: $78,800 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetGREEN OUR PLANET: $25,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSAVE THE CHIMPS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Smith Center for the Performing Arts: $8,564 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNathan Adelson Hospice Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHREE SQUARE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW DIRECTIONS FOR WOMEN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCASA OF LOS ANGELES: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPUR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Nevada Community Foun…Susan G Fine Family F…Brenden Mann Foundati…Wynn Resorts Foundati…Engelstad Family Foun…United Way of Souther…Mgm Resorts FoundationJewish Community Foun…Bny Mellon Charitable…American Gift FundGs Donor Advised Phil…National Philanthropi…
Nevada Community Foundation IncNV17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Nevada Community Foundation Inc · Susan G Fine Family Foundation · Brenden Mann Foundation Co Dorsey & Whitney · Wynn Resorts Foundation · Engelstad Family Foundation · United Way of Southern Nevada · Mgm Resorts Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · Bny Mellon Charitable Gift Fund · American Gift Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Jeffrey and Jane Greenspun Gale funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jeffrey and Jane Greenspun Gale. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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, 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.

    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 19 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Jeffrey and Jane Greenspun Gale’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