Skip to content

· Private foundation

Mari and Norman Epstein Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$134k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$25k
Largest
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 2024.

Animals$833kEnvironment$54kFood & Nutrition$38kYouth Development$9kArts & Culture$6kHuman Services$3kHealth$1kEmployment$1kOther$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $127k
$20,421
Median grant
5
States reached
$451k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ANIMAL EQUALITY$25,000
INTERNATIONAL PRIMATE PROTECTION LEAGUE$20,422
WILD AID$20,422
ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE$20,421
WILD BIRD FUND$20,421
ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE$10,000
WILD BIRD FUND$10,000
DAYS END FARM HORSE RESCUE$5,000
GIRLS INC$1,000
ANIMAL RESCUE OF THE HAMPTONS$1,000
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%COMPASSION IN WORLD FARMING: $1k → 14%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 10% of Mari and Norman Epstein Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Mari and Norman Epstein Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$917k · 19 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
7

Total granted

$917k
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
+192%

Still filing today

84%
57%

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
AnimalsHuman ServicesArts & CultureInternationalYouth DevelopmentFood & NutritionOther
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

  • AE
    Animal Equality
    6× · 2018–2024 · $179k · revenue +73%
  • WB
    WILD BIRD FUND INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $159k · revenue +127%
  • WI
    WILDAID INC
    7× · 2018–2024 · $147k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • MF
    MERCY FOR ANIMALS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $20k · revenue +106%
  • WI
    WHYHUNGER INC
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue -4%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
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
Animal Agriculture Alliance

The animal agriculture alliance is a nonprofit organization that helps bridge the communication gap between farm and fork. we connect food industry stakeholders, engage food chain influencers and promote consumer choice by helping key…

Food & Nutrition
2
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
3
Global Food Partners Inc

Global food partners ("gfp") is an animal protection organization whose mission is to help food businesses meet their cage-free egg commitments and producers implement cage-free best practices.

Food & Nutrition
4
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
5
World Federation for Animals Inc

The world federation for animals (wfa) is a membership organization to improve the well-being of all animals and end exploitation and suffering. wfa has three primary focus areas: policy research, analysis, and information sharing;…

Animals
6
Wildearth Guardians

Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.

Unclassified
7
Fauna & Flora International Usa Inc

Our mission is to act to conserve threatened species and ecosystems worldwide, choosing solutions that are sustainable, based on sound science and take into account human needs.

Philanthropy
8
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
9
Marin Humane Society

Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.

Animals
10
Worldwide Vets Incorporated

Our goal is to sustainably improve animal welfare, provide veterinary care, and improve veterinary education globally. in order to achieve this goal, we work in over 10 countries, across 5 continents, supporting local people and animals,…

Animals
11
Food Animal Concerns Trust (Fact Inc)

Food animal concerns trust (fact) promotes the safe and humane production of meat, milk, and eggs. fact envisions that all food-producing animals be raised in a healthy and humane manner so that everyone will have access to safe and…

Animals
12
Food & Water Watch

Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mercy for Animals Inc; the most unlike its peers is Dancing Dreams. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 26 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
19/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Animal Equality: $178,673 · AnimalsAnimal EqualityWILD BIRD FUND INC: $159,047 · AnimalsWILD BIRD FUND INCWILDAID INC: $147,068 · AnimalsWILDAID INCANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $97,774 · AnimalsANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTEINTERNATIONAL PRIMATE PROTECTION LEAGUE: $95,902 · AnimalsINTERNATIONAL PRIMATE PROTECTION LEAGUETHE HUMANE LEAGUE: $46,000 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE LEAGUEAmerican Bird Conservancy: $27,797 · Animals+4 more: $68,500 · Animals+4 moreRAINFOREST TRUST: $54,166 · InternationalHUNGER FREE AMERICA INC: $17,000 · OtherANIMAL RESCUE OF THE HAMPTONS: $12,000 · Other+5 more: $3,700 · OtherTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $16,000 · Food & NutritionDANCING DREAMS: $6,000 · Arts & CultureWHYHUNGER INC: $5,000 · Arts & CultureGIRLS INC: $8,000 · Youth DevelopmentW CONNECTION INC: $1,500 · Human ServicesCompassion in World Farming Inc: $1,000 · Human ServicesPER SCHOLAS INC: $1,000 · Employment
Animals$820,761International$54,166Other$32,700Food & Nutrition$16,000Arts & Culture$11,000Youth Development$8,000Human Services$2,500Employment$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAnimal Equality: $178,673 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetWILD BIRD FUND INC: $159,047 over 8y, 2.3% of budgetWILDAID INC: $147,068 over 7y, 1.0% of budgetANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $97,774 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetINTERNATIONAL PRIMATE PROTECTION LEAGUE: $95,902 over 8y, 1.1% of budgetRAINFOREST TRUST: $54,166 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE HUMANE LEAGUE: $46,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Bird Conservancy: $27,797 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetDAYS END FARM HORSE RESCUE INC: $26,500 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHUNGER FREE AMERICA INC: $17,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC: $16,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $16,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS INC: $8,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL OUTLOOK INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetDANCING DREAMS: $6,000 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetWHYHUNGER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetW CONNECTION INC: $1,500 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetPER SCHOLAS INC: $1,000 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 Animal Equality ↗
  • Who funds WILD BIRD FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds WILDAID INC ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL PRIMATE PROTECTION LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds RAINFOREST TRUST ↗
  • Who funds THE HUMANE LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds American Bird Conservancy ↗
  • Who funds DAYS END FARM HORSE RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds MERCY FOR ANIMALS INC ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER FREE AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INC ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL OUTLOOK INC ↗
  • Who funds DANCING DREAMS ↗
  • Who funds WHYHUNGER INC ↗
  • Who funds W CONNECTION INC ↗
  • Who funds Compassion in World Farming Inc ↗
  • Who funds PER SCHOLAS 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.

Greater Kansas City Community FoundationMO13× affinity4 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Aetna Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Mari and Norman Epstein Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mari and Norman Epstein Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 Mari and Norman Epstein Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Mari and Norman Epstein 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 26 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 Mari and Norman Epstein’s filings →

    More from the funding graph