Skip to content

· Private foundation

Lawrence Weissberg Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$35k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$8k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$97kCivil Rights$65kArts & Culture$61kPhilanthropy$60kHealth$45kInternational$41kHousing & Shelter$39k
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION AND ENDOWMENT FUND$8,000
J THE JEWISH NEWS$7,000
AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE$5,500
JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL$5,000
JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES$4,000
HEALTHRIGHT 360$2,000
INSTITUTE OF AGING$2,000
JEWISH HOME & SENIOR LIVING$1,500
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 (FY17–24, $97k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $8k → 10%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $7k → 10%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $7k → 10%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $6k → 10%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $5k → 10%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $4k → 10%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $2k → 10%INSTITUTE OF AGING: $2k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $11k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $8k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $8k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $7k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $7k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $6k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $5k → 10%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $4k → 10%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$292k · 10 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
0

Total granted

$292k
$0

Still filing today

80%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterHealthCivil RightsOther
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

  • IO
    INSTITUTE ON AGING
    8× · 2017–2024 · $41k · revenue +121%
  • HEALTHRIGHT 360
    6× · 2019–2024 · $19k · revenue +38%
  • AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE
    2× · 2023–2024 · $11k · revenue +44%

Funded once

    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
    Sutter Bay Hospitals

    MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

    Health
    2
    Jewish Family Services of Greenwich

    Jewish family services of greenwich (jfs) is a nonprofit social service agency dedicated to strengthening individuals and families in fairfield and new london counties. jfs provides behavioral health counseling, food security programs,…

    —
    3
    The Contemporary Jewish Museum

    The contemporary jewish museum (the cjm) makes the diversity of the jewish experience relevant for a twenty-first-century audience through innovative exhibitions and programs that educate, challenge, and inspire.

    Arts & Culture
    4
    The Jerusalem Connection
    —
    5
    Jewish Community Relations Council of New York

    Jcrc-ny builds relationships to advance the values, interests and security of the new york jewish community and to create a more interconnected new york for all.

    Civil Rights
    6
    San Francisco Challenge dba AmericaOne
    Recreation & Sports
    7
    Yeshiva University

    The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.

    Education
    8
    Jewish Federation of Greater Atlanta Inc

    The jewish federation of greater atlanta cares for, connects and strengthens our jewish community throughout greater atlanta, israel and the world.

    Philanthropy
    9
    Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago

    Juf provides critical resources that bring food, refuge, health care, education and emergency assistance to over 500,000 chicagoans of all faiths and millions of jews in israel and around the world, funding a network of 100+ agencies,…

    Philanthropy
    10
    Sutter Bay Medical Foundation

    Mission statement: mission: caring for our patients first and our people always. vision: to be the most comprehensive, integrated and connected health system for getting and staying well. values: excellence - we deliver high-quality,…

    Health
    11
    Jewish Federation of Greater Portland

    To assure the building and strengthening of the jewish community locally, nationally, overseas and in israel, in accordance with jewish values.

    Philanthropy
    12
    Jewish Federation of Southern Arizona

    Jewish philanthropies of southern arizona (jpsa) is committed to achieving the full potential of jewish philanthropy, now and for future generations. comprised of jewish federation of southern arizona (jfsa or federation) and jewish…

    Philanthropy
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family and Children's Services; the most unlike its peers is Blue Star Pr. 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

    10 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. 10 of the 12 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)
    10/10
    Grantees still filing
    5/10
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULA: $54,000 · OtherJEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF…J THE JEWISH NEWS: $46,000 · OtherJ THE JEWISH NEWSHEALTHRIGHT 360: $19,000 · OtherHEALTHRIGHT 360JEWISH NEWSWEEKLY OF NORTHERN CA: $15,100 · OtherJEWISH NEWSWEEKLY OF NORTHERN CAJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $55,500 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN…INSTITUTE ON AGING: $41,000 · Human ServicesINSTITUTE ON AGINGJEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA: $60,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH COMMUNITY…Thrive Networks Global: $26,000 · InternationalThrive Netw…BLUE STAR PR: $15,000 · InternationalBLUE STAR P…THE JEWISH HOME AND SENIOR LIVING FOUNDATION: $39,000 · Housing & ShelterTHE JEWISH…CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CNTR FNDN: $26,000 · HealthAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $11,000 · Civil Rights
    Other$134,100Human Services$96,500Philanthropy$60,000International$41,000Housing & Shelter$39,000Health$26,000Civil Rights$11,000

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

    25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA: $60,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $55,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULA: $54,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetINSTITUTE ON AGING: $41,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE JEWISH HOME AND SENIOR LIVING FOUNDATION: $39,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetThrive Networks Global: $26,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CNTR FNDN: $26,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHEALTHRIGHT 360: $19,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBLUE STAR PR: $15,000 over 6y, 4.4% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $11,000 over 2y, 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.

    • Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA ↗
    • Who funds JEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES ↗
    • Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY RELATIONS COUNCIL OF SAN FRANCISCO MARIN & PENINSULA ↗
    • Who funds INSTITUTE ON AGING ↗
    • Who funds THE JEWISH HOME AND SENIOR LIVING FOUNDATION ↗
    • Who funds Thrive Networks Global ↗
    • Who funds CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CNTR FNDN ↗
    • Who funds HEALTHRIGHT 360 ↗
    • Who funds BLUE STAR PR ↗
    • Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE ↗

    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.

    Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: 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 Lawrence Weissberg Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lawrence Weissberg Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
      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 Lawrence Weissberg Foundation?

      Find your warmest path to Lawrence Weissberg 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 12 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

      Source object · view filing

      Play a game based on Lawrence Weissberg’s filings →

      More from the funding graph