Skip to content

· Private foundation

Laszig Ij Tr

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$62k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Public Benefit$95kHealth$64kRecreation & Sports$37kEducation$19kFood & Nutrition$17kHuman Services$12k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $51k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TOWN OF RIDGEFIELD$20,000
RIDGEFIELD LIBRARY ASSOCIATION INC$11,200
VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF RIDGEFIELD$10,000
FOUNDERS HALL FOUNDATION INC$10,000
MEALS ON WHEELS OF RIDGEFIELD$5,000
REGIONAL HOSPICE AND HOME CARE OF WESTER$3,000
RIDES FOR RIDGEFIELD INC$3,000
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.

None of its grants could be placed against low income need for this view.

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$238k · 6 repeat orgs$6k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
1

Total granted

$238k
$3k

Still filing today

83%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionEducationOther
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

  • RI
    RVNAHEALTH INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $61k · revenue +32%
  • FH
    Founders Hall Foundation Inc
    5× · 2021–2025 · $37k · revenue +21%
  • RL
    Ridgefield Library Association Inc
    3× · 2021–2025 · $16k · revenue +2%

Funded once

  • RL
    RIDGEFIELD LIBRARY ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
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
04the grantee network

5 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. 5 of the 8 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
3/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TOWN OF RIDGEFIELD: $95,000 · OtherTOWN OF RIDGEFIELDRVNAHEALTH INC: $61,000 · OtherRVNAHEALTH INC+2 more: $6,000 · OtherFounders Hall Foundation Inc: $37,000 · Human ServicesFounders Hall Foundati…RIDES FOR RIDGEFIELD INC: $12,000 · Human ServicesRIDES FOR RIDGEFIELD I…MEALS ON WHEELS OF RIDGEFIELD INC: $17,000 · Food & NutritionRidgefield Library Association Inc: $16,200 · Education
Other$162,000Human Services$49,000Food & Nutrition$17,000Education$16,200

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRVNAHEALTH INC: $61,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetFounders Hall Foundation Inc: $37,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS OF RIDGEFIELD INC: $17,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetRidgefield Library Association Inc: $16,200 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetRIDES FOR RIDGEFIELD INC: $12,000 over 4y, 5.0% 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.

  • Who funds RVNAHEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds Founders Hall Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS OF RIDGEFIELD INC ↗
  • Who funds Ridgefield Library Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds RIDES FOR RIDGEFIELD INC ↗

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.

Ge Aerospace FoundationCT14.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ge Aerospace Foundation · The Lawrence a Bossidy Foundation · Ridgefield Thrift Shop 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 Laszig Ij Tr funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Laszig Ij Tr. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 45%
  • Rides for Ridgefield Inc: 45% of income from government
  • Rvnahealth Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 8 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 Laszig Ij Tr’s filings →

More from the funding graph