Skip to content
Leenath Foundation Ts Netzer-Managing Trustee at a glance

· Private foundation

Leenath Foundation Ts Netzer-Managing Trustee

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$59k
Granted FY2026still arriving
21
Grants FY2026still arriving
5
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2026.

Philanthropy$125kArts & Culture$100kHealth$58kReligion$36kHuman Services$21kYouth Development$21kEducation$10kRecreation & Sports$10kOther$0
02FY2026 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k19 grants · $36k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $23k
$2,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$560k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH$12,600
MASS FOUNDATION FOR THE HUMANITIES$10,000
PITTSBURGH YOUTH LEADERSHIP$5,000
STEEL CITY SQUASH$5,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$4,000
FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE$4,000
JEWISH FAMILY & COMMON SERV$3,250
JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING$3,250
TEMPLE SINAI$3,000
UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$2,000
UPMC DEPARTMENT OF UROLOGY$2,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
FRIENDS OF DANA FARBER$1,000
MCMULLEN MUSEUM-BOSTON COLLEGE$1,000
Individual grant recipient$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 (FY17–26, $17k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, 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%Adolescent Consultation Services Inc: $250 → 8%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $3k → 11%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $250 → 8%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%judge baker children's center: $250 → 16%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $2k → 11%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $1k → 11%JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $250 → 16%JEWISH FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES: $1k → 11%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $1k → 11%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $1k → 11%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $1k → 11%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $750 → 11%JEWISH FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES: $500 → 11%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $200 → 11%CARRIAGE HOUSE CHILDREN'S CENTER: $200 → 11%CARRIAGE HOUSE CHILDREN'S CENTER: $200 → 11%CARRIAGE HOUSE CHILDREN'S CENTER: $200 → 11%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $150 → 11%JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $100 → 11%CARRIAGE HOUSE CHILDREN'S CENTER: $100 → 11%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MI
NY
MA
OH
PA
NJ
CA
CO
VA
TN
DC
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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$270k · 32 repeat orgs$12k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +55% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

32 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2026, 14 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

32
27

Total granted

$270k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
0%

Still filing today

59%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
EducationHuman ServicesHealthInternationalArts & CultureCivil 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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    10× · 2017–2026 · $22k · revenue +202%
  • PY
    PITTSBURGH YOUTH LEADERSHIP
    10× · 2017–2026 · $14k · revenue +46%
  • SC
    STEEL CITY SQUASH INC
    5× · 2018–2026 · $7k · revenue +633%

Funded once

  • PS
    PRESBYTERIAN SR CARE
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
  • HI
    HIAS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $2k · revenue -28%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH cancer institute
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
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
Point Park University

Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…

—
2
The Trustees of Princeton University

Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…

Education
3
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
4
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
5
Metropolitan Jewish Health System Inc

Mjhs health system is a charitable not-for-profit established to support the activities of affiliated organizations. mjhs is built on the core values of compassion, dignity and respect, first established by the four brooklyn ladies in…

Health
6
Hillel Jewish University Center

To enrich the lives of jewish undergraduate students so that they may enrich the jewish people and the world.

—
7
Pennsylvania Academic Library Consortium Inc

To support education and research at college, university, and research libraries.

Education
8
Allegheny Conference On Community Development

See schedule othe allegheny conference on community development (accd) and affiliates - the greater pittsburgh chamber of commerce (chamber), the pennsylvania economy league of greater pittsburgh(pelgp) and the pittsburgh regional alliance…

—
9
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
10
Aacsb International - the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business

Aacsb international provides quality assurance of business school programs, the latest in business education intelligence, thought leadership, and learning and development services.

Education
11
Delaware Valley University

See schedule o.we are inspired by the ideals of our founder who, in 1896, emphasized respect for all people and ideas, who honored knowledge with practice, progress and the common good. our historical commitment to experiential learning…

—
12
University Family Physicians Inc

Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Pittsburgh; the most unlike its peers is Pavers 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

37 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 37 of the 63 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
36/37
Grantees still filing
25/37
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MASS FOUNDATION FOR THE HUMANITIES: $89,000 · OtherMASS FOUNDATION FOR THE HUMANITIESTEMPLE SINAI: $27,200 · OtherTEMPLE SINAIUniversity of Michigan: $22,000 · OtherUniversity of MichiganUPMC DEPARTMENT OF UROLOGY: $20,000 · OtherUPMC DEPARTMENT OF UROLOGYFRIENDS OF DANA FARBER: $10,000 · OtherMCMULLEN MUSEUM-BOSTON COLLEGE: $10,000 · Other+38 more: $45,375 · Other+38 moreJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $115,200 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PIT…JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $10,050 · Human ServicesADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesJUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $2,500 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF PITTSBURGH: $1,500 · Human ServicesCARRIAGE HOUSE CHILDREN'S CENTER INC: $700 · Human ServicesSTEEL CITY SQUASH INC: $7,000 · EducationSTEM CODING LAB INC: $5,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $3,500 · EducationALUMNI ASSOCIATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $675 · Education+2 more: $200 · EducationPITTSBURGH YOUTH LEADERSHIP: $14,000 · Youth DevelopmentMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $2,500 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INC: $2,500 · InternationalHIAS INC: $2,000 · International+2 more: $300 · InternationalGATHER INC: $3,000 · Religion
Other$223,575Philanthropy$115,200Human Services$17,250Education$16,375Youth Development$14,000International$7,300Religion$3,000

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 budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH: $115,200 over 10y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Michigan: $22,000 over 10y, 1.5% of budgetPITTSBURGH YOUTH LEADERSHIP: $14,000 over 10y, 0.8% of budgetJEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING: $10,050 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetSTEEL CITY SQUASH INC: $7,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSTEM CODING LAB INC: $5,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH: $3,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGATHER INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPavers Inc: $3,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC: $2,500 over 10y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $2,500 over 10y, 0.0% of budgetJUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER: $2,500 over 10y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $2,500 over 10y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WESTERN PA INC: $2,200 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHIAS INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE: $1,668 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF PITTSBURGH: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCARRIAGE HOUSE CHILDREN'S CENTER INC: $700 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBig Brothers Big Sisters of Greater Pittsburgh Inc: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCarnegie Mellon University: $600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCARNEGIE INSTITUTE: $550 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSquirrel Hill Urban Coalition: $380 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMUSIC ASSOCIATES OF ASPEN INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPITTSBURGH OPERA INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH NATIONAL FUND (KEREN KAYEMETH LEISRAEL) INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCARNEGIE LIBRARY OF PITTSBURGH: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCONQUER CANCER FOUNDATION OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROW PITTSBURGH: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCR JRS CHIP: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSJOGREN'S FOUNDATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Women and Girls Foundation of Southwest Pennsylvania: $50 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.

  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds PITTSBURGH YOUTH LEADERSHIP ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH ASSOCIATION ON AGING ↗
  • Who funds STEEL CITY SQUASH INC ↗
  • Who funds STEM CODING LAB INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds GATHER INC ↗
  • Who funds Pavers Inc ↗
  • Who funds ADOLESCENT CONSULTATION SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds JUDGE BAKER CHILDREN'S CENTER ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WESTERN PA INC ↗
  • Who funds HIAS INC ↗
  • Who funds THE URBAN LAND INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICE OF PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds CARRIAGE HOUSE CHILDREN'S CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds ALUMNI ASSOCIATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN ↗
  • Who funds Big Brothers Big Sisters of Greater Pittsburgh Inc ↗
  • Who funds Carnegie Mellon University ↗
  • Who funds CARNEGIE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Squirrel Hill Urban Coalition ↗

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.

The Grable FoundationThe Pittsburgh Founda…Hillman Family Founda…Richard King Mellon F…The Heinz EndowmentsAllegheny FoundationJewish Federation of …Fourteen Ten Foundati…The Benter FoundationThe Burke FoundationThe Burke Family Foun…McElhattan Foundation
The Grable FoundationPA26× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Grable Foundation · The Pittsburgh Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · Richard King Mellon Foundation · The Heinz Endowments · Allegheny Foundation · Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh · Fourteen Ten Foundation · The Benter Foundation · The Burke Foundation · The Burke Family Foundation · McElhattan 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 Leenath Foundation Ts Netzer-Managing Trustee funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Leenath Foundation Ts Netzer-Managing Trustee. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 88%
  • Hias Inc: 88% of income from government
  • Judge Baker Children's Center: 29% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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.

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 63 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Leenath Foundation Ts Netzer-Managing Trustee’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