Skip to content
John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation at a glance

· 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
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund For Wealth Management Inc, 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 it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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
Friends of the Vineyard Haven Library$1,000
STAR, Inc.$1,000
Call-A-Ride of Greenwich$500
National MS Society$500
CPBN/CT Public Broadcasting, Inc.$500
The Hank Foundation$300
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 (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 98% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its 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
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.

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

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +90% since the first grant, against +22% for those 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
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

  • 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 +47%
  • UJ
    UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $13k · revenue +34%
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
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…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Naacp Legal Defense & Educ Fund Inc; 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 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. 18 of the 24 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 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 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
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.

Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
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

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 John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from John S and Amy S Weinberg Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 34%
  • Martha's Vineyard Community Foundation Inc: 34% of income from government
  • The Yard Inc: 28% 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, 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 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 24 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on John S and Amy S Weinberg’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