· Private foundation
Neal and Marlene Goldman 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $23k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $90k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| INSTITUTE FOR EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| ATLAS NETWORK | $15,000 |
| BRAIN & BEHAVIOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION | $10,000 |
| THE BECKET FUND | $10,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY INC | $5,000 |
| THE JAMES MADISON INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| STATE POLICY NETWORK | $5,000 |
| DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER | $5,000 |
| NEW YORK CIVIL RIGHTS COALITION | $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 (FY19–19, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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.
19 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
- FFFOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $244k · revenue +267%
- IFINSTITUTE FOR EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT INC7× · 2017–2023 · $200k · revenue +0%
- NANATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION6× · 2017–2024 · $83k · revenue +60%
Funded once
- BGBARRY GOLDWATER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCHgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +97%
- TDTHE DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue +20%
- WCWEILL CORNELL AUTISM RESEARCHone grant, 2017 · $10k
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.
The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…
The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
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.
To provide accurate, objective information and analysis on international strategic issues for legislators, diplomats, foreign affairs analysts, international business leaders, economists, the military, defense commentators, journalists,…
The Knight First Amendment Institute defends the freedoms of speech and the press in the digital age through strategic litigation, research, public advocacy and public education. Our aim is to promote a system of free expression that is…
Iri advances freedom and democracy worldwide by developing political parties, civic institutions, open elections, democratic governance and the rule of law.
To create a nation where everyone enjoys a fair share of our collective prosperity.
The r street institute is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, public-policy research organization ("think tank"). our mission is to engage in policy research and outreach to promote free markets and limited, effective government. (continued on…
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…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Foundation for Government Accountability Inc and the most unlike its peers is Houston Livestock Show and Rodeo Inc. 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 34 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.
26 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 26 of the 38 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 FOUNDATION FOR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND EXPRESSION INC ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION ↗
- Who funds The Becket Fund ↗
- Who funds New York Civil Rights Coalition Inc ↗
- Who funds FREEDOMWORKS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds MANHATTAN INSTITUTE FOR POLICY RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds FOUNTAIN HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL REVIEW INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds FERONIA FORWARD LTD ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR EDUCATIONAL ADVANCEMENT ↗
- Who funds BARRY GOLDWATER INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE DAILY CALLER NEWS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DAVID HOROWITZ FREEDOM CENTER ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF BERGEN COUNTY ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds STATE POLICY NETWORK ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY INC ↗
- Who funds THE JAMES MADISON INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY STUDIES INC ↗
- Who funds LET GROW INC ↗
- Who funds GIFT OF LIFE MARROW REGISTRY INC ↗
- Who funds HOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODEO INC ↗
- Who funds YANKEE INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds Russian Children's Welfare Society Inc ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
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: Donors Trust Inc · The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation Inc · State Policy Network · Beth and Ravenel Curry Foundation · Adolph Coors Foundation · Charles Koch Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Neal and Marlene Goldman 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Neal and Marlene Goldman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Neal and Marlene Goldman 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.