· Private foundation
Mitchell & Kathy Racoosin Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 45% of MITCHELL & KATHY RACOOSIN FAMILY FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $3k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $65k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S | $75,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE INC | $20,000 |
| CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| GREENPEACE FUND | $10,000 |
| JDRF | $2,500 |
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 (FY17–24, $44k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 59% 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 +62% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
37 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 33 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, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $78k 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
CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC9× · 2017–2025 · $128k · revenue +53%
GREENPEACE FUND INC9× · 2017–2025 · $90k · revenue +31%- OCOCEAN CONSERVANCY8× · 2017–2024 · $80k · revenue +97%
Funded once
- BJBENDER JCC OF GREATER WASHINGTONone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +6%
FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCESone grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue 0%- U2UNITED 24one grant, 2022 · $8k
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Conservation law foundation, inc. (clf) protects new england's environment for the benefit of all people and future generations. we use the law, science, and markets to create solutions that preserve and restore our natural resources,…
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…
Recognizing that a healthy environment is critical to the well-being and survival of all living things, new jersey conservation foundation is devoted to preserving land and protecting natural resources throughout new jersey's (continued on…
To address, educate, coordinate, and enhance enforcement capacity to end teh trade in coral reef wildlife for household and other small display aquariums. our supply and demand side strategies are directed locally and globally to…
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Friends of the Earth and the most unlike its peers is Bender Jcc of Greater Washington. 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 35 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
47 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. 47 of the 73 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 CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds GREENPEACE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Rainforest Action Network ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds COOL EARTH ACTION USA INC ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE SCIENCE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds HEALTHY GULF ↗
- Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds Reef Relief Inc ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE MANATEE CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds BENDER JCC OF GREATER WASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds NATIVE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds HUNTINGTON'S DISEASE SOCIETY OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
- Who funds BILLION OYSTER PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds United Help Ukraine Inc ↗
- Who funds SUBURBAN HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN 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: Clark-Winchcole Foundation · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Mitchell & Kathy Racoosin 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- The Montgomery County Coalition for the Homeless Inc — 19% of income from government
- Chesapeake Bay Foundation Inc — 2% of income from government
- Bender Jcc of Greater Washington — 1% of income from government
- Adoptions Together Inc Dba As Paths for Families — 0% of income from government
- Suburban Hospital Inc — 0% 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.