Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$25k
Granted FY2019
9
Grants FY2019
3
States reached
$15k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 5 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $25k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

5
19
0
20
0
21
2
22
4
23
4
24
5
25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What you fund
0189% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20192025.

Philanthropy$7.1MArts & Culture$53kHuman Services$30kHealth$23kEducation$18kCivil Rights$16kInternational$15kRecreation & Sports$8kOther$0
02FY2019 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k8 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$24M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Foreign Policy Association$15,000
The Skin Cancer Foundation$5,000
Smith College$1,500
STAR, Inc.$1,000
Friends of the Vineyard Haven Library$1,000
National MS Society$500
Call-A-Ride of Greenwich$500
CPBN/CT Public Broadcasting, Inc.$500
The Hank Foundation$300
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 98% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Apple Orchard Trust: $10k → 7%Marthas Vineyard Community Foundation Inc: $20k → 8%THE SKIN CANCER FOUNDATION: $5k → 17%American Farmland Trust: $5k → 14%MAKE-A-WISH CONNECTICUT: $20k → 9%US SKI & SNOWBOARD FOUNDATION: $8k → 5%American Academy of Dermatology Inc: $2k → 14%The Yard: $2k → 8%The Skin Cancer Foundation: $5k → 17%MAKE-A-WISH CONNECTICUT: $10k → 9%THE SKIN CANCER FOUNDATION: $5k → 17%NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND: $10k → 17%American Jewish Committee: $6k → 17%The Carnegie Hall Corporation: $17k → 17%The Carnegie Hall Corporation: $17k → 17%NATIONAL DANCE INSTITUTE INC: $2k → 17%Goldman Sachs Philanthropy Fund: $3.0M → 17%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.

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.

46%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$83k · 3 repeat orgs$98k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +90% since the first grant, against +22% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2019, 2 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
19

Total granted

$83k
$98k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+90%
+22%

Still filing today

67%
74%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureCivil RightsPhilanthropyHealthRecreation & SportsInternationalOther

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

  • TC
    THE CARNEGIE HALL CORPORATION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $33k · revenue +13%
  • MC
    MAKE-A-WISH CONNECTICUT
    2× · 2023–2024 · $30k
  • TS
    THE SKIN CANCER FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2019–2025 · $20k · revenue +90%

Funded once

  • FP
    FOREIGN POLICY ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +22%
  • CA
    CALLING ALL CROWS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +34%
  • UJ
    UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $13k · revenue +34%

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
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
2
Institute for Advanced Study - Louis Bamberger & Mrs Felix Fuld Foundation

The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.

Science & Tech
3
The American College of Trust and Estate Counsel

Enhance the ability of actec members to provide the most efficient and highest quality services to their clients; develop qualified trust and estate counselors; improve and reform probate, trust and tax laws, procedures, and standards of…

Community Improvement
4
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
5
American Law Institute

The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…

Crime & Legal
6
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

7
Manhattanville University

To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.

Education
8
American Academy of Dermatology Association Inc

To represent the interests of dermatologists and their patients. to influence and be a credible resource for public and private entities related to all policies and regulations that have the potential to affect the delivery of dermatologic…

Health
9
American Academy of Arts & Sciences

Founded in 1780, the american academy of arts and sciences honors excellence and convenes leaders from every field of human endeavor to examine new ideas, address issues of importance to the nation and the world, and work together "to…

Social Science
10
Manhattan School of Music

Manhattan school of music is deeply committed to excellence in education, performance, and creative activity; to the humanity of the school's environment; and to the cultural enrichment of the larger community. a premiere international…

Arts & Culture
11
Cornell University

Education, research, medical services and other public services.

Education
12
National Science and Technology Medals Foundation Inc

The nstmf's mission is to build inclusive stem communities across the united states. fundamental to these communities are the significant, inspirational connections we foster between the individuals who have received national recognition…

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Naacp Legal Defense & Educ Fund Inc and the most unlike its peers is Call-a-Ride of Greenwich 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

18 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. 18 of the 24 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

GS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC — $7,082,466 · PhilanthropyGS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC+3 more — $42,500 · PhilanthropyMAKE-A-WISH CONNECTICUT — $30,000 · OtherTHE SKIN CANCER FOUNDATION INC — $20,000 · OtherEVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION — $5,000 · Other+8 more — $7,300 · OtherTHE CARNEGIE HALL CORPORATION — $33,333 · Arts & CultureTHE YARD INC — $2,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL DANCE INSTITUTE — $2,000 · Arts & CultureCALLING ALL CROWS INC — $15,000 · Civil RightsNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC — $10,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE — $6,250 · Civil RightsFOREIGN POLICY ASSOCIATION INC — $15,000 · InternationalUnited States Ski Team Foundation — $7,666 · Recreation & SportsAMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST — $5,000 · Food & Nutrition
Philanthropy$7,124,966Other$62,300Arts & Culture$37,333Civil Rights$31,250International$15,000Recreation & Sports$7,666Food & Nutrition$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetGS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC — $7,082,466 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CARNEGIE HALL CORPORATION — $33,333 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SKIN CANCER FOUNDATION INC — $20,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCALLING ALL CROWS INC — $15,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC — $12,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUnited States Ski Team Foundation — $7,666 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE — $6,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE YARD INC — $2,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNATIONAL DANCE INSTITUTE — $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TRUSTEES OF THE SMITH COLLEGE — $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY — $500 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.

Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA11.6× affinity7 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 John S and Amy S Weinberg 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 · 20%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 34%
  • Martha's Vineyard Community Foundation Inc34% of income from government
  • The Yard Inc28% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation?

Find your warmest path to John S and Amy S Weinberg 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 24 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