Skip to content
Negrin Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Negrin 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.

$250k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Human Services$595kHealth$385kPublic Safety & Disaster$200kFood & Nutrition$175kReligion$165kCommunity Improvement$50kEducation$25kInternational$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $150k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
$35,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$5.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEMPLE B-NAI TORAH$50,000
CALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION$50,000
KINDERING CENTER$40,000
SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION$35,000
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION TEXAS HILL COUNTRY$25,000
LOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK$25,000
JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES$25,000
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 (FY19–25, $295k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 9%SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $35k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $20k → 9%SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $35k → 9%SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 9%SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 9%SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $20k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $10k → 9%SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $20k → 9%HEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION (HFLA): $10k → 9%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

WA
IL
NY
MA
IA
CA
DC
TX
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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 8 repeat orgs$425k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +43% since the first grant, against +31% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
8

Total granted

$1.2M
$325k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+31%

Still filing today

88%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesFood & NutritionEducationCommunity ImprovementInternationalOther
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

  • KC
    KINDERING CENTER
    6× · 2019–2025 · $265k · revenue +29%
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $225k · revenue +43%
  • SC
    SAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2025 · $160k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • Feeding Americagraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +40%
  • TO
    THE ONESTAR FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -70%
  • KG
    Kline Galland Centergraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $35k · revenue +527%
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
United States Association for Unhcr

USA for UNHCR protects and supports refugees by mobilizing resources, elevating awareness, and driving action through a network of engaged supporters.

International
2
The Global FoodBanking Network

To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.

International
3
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
4
Jewish Family and Children's Service of Minneapolis

Jewish family and children's service of minneapolis provides essential services to people of all ages and backgrounds to sustain healthy relationships, ease suffering and offer support in times of need.

Human Services
5
Food Lifeline

Food lifeline's mission is to feed people experiencing hunger today while working to end hunger tomorrow.

Food & Nutrition
6
Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho

To provide exceptional reproductive and complementary health care services, honest education, and advocacy for all.

Health
7
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
8
Feeding San Diego

On a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals by maximizing food rescue. through direct service and community partnerships, feeding san diego provides more than 26 million meals each year to children, families,…

Food & Nutrition
9
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
10
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
11
King County Sexual Assault Resource Center

KCSARC is the largest and most comprehensive non-profit provider of sexual assault services in King County and Washington State. Our vision is a community free of sexual violence. Our mission is to: give voice to victims, their families,…

—
12
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc; the most unlike its peers is Feeding America. 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

16 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. 16 of the 19 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
12/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

KINDERING CENTER: $265,000 · OtherKINDERING CENTERTEMPLE B NAI TORAH: $165,000 · OtherTEMPLE B NAI TORAHCALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATIONCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION TEXAS HILL COUNTRY: $25,000 · OtherLOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK: $25,000 · Other+1 more: $10,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $225,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATIO…CAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS: $130,000 · HealthCAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KI…Kline Galland Center: $35,400 · HealthKline Galland CenterPLANNED PARENTHOOD GREAT NORTHWEST HAWAII ALASKA INDIANA AND KENTUCKY: $20,000 · HealthSAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $160,000 · Human ServicesSAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATIONJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $125,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY SERVICEAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $100,000 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross…+1 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesFeeding America: $150,000 · Food & NutritionFeeding Am…ALL HANDS AND HEARTS SMART RESPONSE INC: $50,000 · Public Safety & DisasterTHE ONESTAR FOUNDATION: $50,000 · Community ImprovementUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $25,000 · EducationUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $25,000 · International
Other$540,000Health$410,400Human Services$395,000Food & Nutrition$150,000Public Safety & Disaster$50,000Community Improvement$50,000Education$25,000International$25,000

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 budgetKINDERING CENTER: $265,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $225,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSAFE CROSSINGS FOUNDATION: $160,000 over 6y, 3.8% of budgetFeeding America: $150,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAMPAIGN FOR TOBACCO-FREE KIDS: $130,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $125,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetALL HANDS AND HEARTS SMART RESPONSE INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE ONESTAR FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetKline Galland Center: $35,400 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetLOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD GREAT NORTHWEST HAWAII ALASKA INDIANA AND KENTUCKY: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEBREW FREE LOAN ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON STATE: $10,000 over 1y, 5.7% 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.

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.

Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN11.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Negrin Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Negrin Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 19 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Negrin’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