· Private foundation
Lawrence & Alice Valenstein Family Fund Inc
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE | $3,000 |
| HEARTGIFT FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
| THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD | $2,500 |
| JUDICIAL WATCH | $2,500 |
| FRIENDS OF THE GOVERNOR'S MANSION | $2,500 |
| MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION | $2,000 |
| CENTRAL TEXAS FOOD BANK | $2,000 |
| AUSTIN ANIMAL CENTER | $1,500 |
| TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
| AUSTIN PETS ALIVE | $1,500 |
| WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT | $1,500 |
| STARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION | $1,200 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| FRIENDS OF PATHWAYS | $1,000 |
| TETON COUNTRY LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +70% since the first grant, against +31% for the ones you funded once.
39 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
EARTHJUSTICE6× · 2017–2023 · $52k · revenue +82%
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC6× · 2017–2023 · $35k · revenue +41%
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED6× · 2017–2023 · $26k · revenue +202%
Funded once
- TATHE ACLU OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIAone grant, 2022 · $6k
- LBLAURA BUSH FOUNDATION FOR AMERICA'S LIBRARIESone grant, 2017 · $3k
- BBREAKTHROUGHgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue +159%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The trust for public land creates parks and protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come. in the past year, we helped communities to plan for parks and conservation, fund parks and conservation,…
To conserve the unique character of tennessee's natural and historic landscapes and sites for future generations.
Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.
The mission of the teton regional land trust is to conserve working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and scenic open spaces in eastern idaho for this and future generations.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
The witte museum inspires people to shape the future of texas through transformative and relevant experiences in nature, science and culture.
Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation (TPWF) is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization thatadvances Texas proud outdoor traditions through meaningful, high-impact programs,partnerships, and a wide range of projects that conserve and enhance our…
To guarantee all americans quality places to hunt and fish.
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Judicial Watch Inc and the most unlike its peers is The J Paul Getty Trust. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 41 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
45 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 45 of the 62 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds HEARTGIFT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds Central Texas Food Bank Inc ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Pursuit Of Excellence ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INC ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC ↗
- Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MUSEUM OF WILDLIFE ART OF THE UNITED STATES ↗
- Who funds Montana Environmental Information Center ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE GOVERNOR'S MANSION ↗
- Who funds STARK MOUNTAIN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance ↗
- Who funds REACH OUT AND READ INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Teton County Search & Rescue Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE J PAUL GETTY TRUST ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SLOW FOOD IN THE TETONS INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF PATHWAYS ↗
- Who funds THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds THE GARDEN CONSERVANCY INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Jackson Hole · The Brooks Foundation · Austin Community Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Ac and Penney Hubbard Foundation Inc · Hughes Charitable Foundation · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust
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 Lawrence & Alice Valenstein Family Fund Inc 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Madison Land Conservation Trust — 68% of income from government
- Reach Out and Read Inc — 9% of income from government
- Shatterproof a Nonprofit Corporation — 2% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Lawrence & Alice Valenstein Family Fund Inc?
Find your warmest path to Lawrence & Alice Valenstein Family Fund Inc 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.