· Private foundation
Mandel Family 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k49 grants · $57k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UCLA FOUNDATION | $35,000 |
| MALDEF | $10,000 |
| OUR VOICE COMMUNITY FOR QUALITY EDUCATION | $6,800 |
| FRIENDS OF THE VERITONES | $5,000 |
| SMITHOSIAN TROPICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| JEWISH FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION | $4,000 |
| ROBESON EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH | $3,000 |
| CITY OF HOPE | $2,500 |
| UNIDOS US | $2,073 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $2,000 |
| THOMAS JEFFERSON EX-STUDENT ASSOCIATION | $2,000 |
| PARTNERS IN HEALTH | $1,890 |
| PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT | $1,500 |
| ACTBLUE CHARITIES | $1,100 |
| AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA | $1,032 |
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 (FY20–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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 +13% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
59 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2025, 29 since wound down; 20 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, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23k 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
- UUNIDOSUS5× · 2021–2025 · $8k · revenue +9%
- CLCommunity Lawyers Inc6× · 2020–2025 · $5k · revenue +249%
PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION3× · 2023–2025 · $5k · revenue +4%
Funded once
- CTCALIFORNIA THOROUGHBRED HORSEMEN'S FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +7%
- HCHARVARD COLLEGE FUNDone grant, 2024 · $6k
- DIDOVE INCone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue +9%
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.
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
The organization is a non-partisan, membership based speakers' forum that connects business leaders, community members, and engaged individuals with shared interest in local, national, and global affairs. it provides an open and accessible…
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…
To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.
Aauw advances gender equity for women and girls through research, education, and advocacy.
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,…
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.
Lcda serves as an advocate and resource to corporate boards, search firms, private equity, and institutional investors interested in gaining access to exceptional latino board talent.
The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…
As noted in its articles of incorporation, the mission of the aclu is "to maintain and advance civil liberties, including, without limitation, the freedoms of association, press, religion and speech, and the rights to the franchise, to due…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Mayor's Fund for Los Angeles and the most unlike its peers is 8 Ball Emergency Fund for Journalists. 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 40 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
68 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 68 of the 150 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 UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds MALDEF - MEXICAN AMERICAN LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA THOROUGHBRED HORSEMEN'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds UNIDOSUS ↗
- Who funds LIDERAMOS THE LATINO LEADERSHIP ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Community Lawyers Inc ↗
- Who funds DOVE INC ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds JEFFERSON EX-STUDENT ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds LATINO DONOR COLLABORATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT ON GOVERNMENT OVERSIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds BILL HILLARY & CHELSEA CLINTON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GEFFEN PLAYHOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds EMPOWERS AFRICA INC ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATED STUDENTS UCLA ↗
- Who funds ACTBLUE CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds Harvard Club of Southern California ↗
- Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
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: California Community Foundation · S Mark Taper Foundation · Weingart Foundation · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Verizon Foundation · Local Initiatives Support Corporation · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good
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 Mandel Family Foundation 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.
- Dove Inc — 60% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- The Childrens Museum — 1% of income from government
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 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.