· Private foundation
Nina W Werblow Charitable Trust
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k21 grants · $79k
- $10k–50k16 grants · $314k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $310k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LINCOLN CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS | $250,000 |
| CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY | $100,000 |
| WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE | $60,000 |
| CHABAD OF BEDFORD | $50,000 |
| NEW YORK UNIVERSITY (SCHOOL OF LAW) | $50,000 |
| URBAN DOVE | $50,000 |
| MAMA FOUNDATION FOR THE ARTS INC | $40,000 |
| SMITHSONIAN ARCHIVES OF AMERICAN ART | $40,000 |
| FILM AT LINCOLN CENTER | $35,000 |
| HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY | $25,000 |
| NORTHERN WESTCHESTER HOSPITAL | $25,000 |
| NEW YORK CARES | $20,000 |
| METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART | $19,000 |
| ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE | $17,500 |
| NEW 42ND STREET | $15,000 |
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, $78k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 64% 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 +30% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
74 repeat relationships — 35 still active in FY2025, 39 since wound down; 7 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, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k 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
- LCLINCOLN CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS INC4× · 2022–2025 · $800k · revenue +29%
- MOMuseum of Modern Art6× · 2020–2025 · $511k · revenue +38%
- TUTHE URBAN DOVE INC6× · 2020–2025 · $490k · revenue +122%
Funded once
- LCLINCOLN CENTER FOR PERFORMING ARTSone grant, 2020 · $150k
- LCLincoln Center for Performing Artsone grant, 2017 · $150k
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOMone grant, 2024 · $125k · revenue 0%
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.
Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.
The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.
The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."
The museum of the city of new york fosters understanding of the distinctive nature of urban life in the world's most influential metropolis. it engages visitors by celebrating, documenting, and interpreting the city's past, present, and…
The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
The graduate center foundation is committed to promoting and safe-guarding the success of the graduate center by raising funds and managing and investing donations for use by the graduate center. the board of trustees of the foundation…
The mission of the brooklyn institute of arts and sciences, d/b/a brooklyn museum (the "museum") is to bring people together through art and experiences that inspire celebration, compassion, courage, and the will to act. (see schedule o).
The Morgan Library & Museum celebrates and shares the history and process of human creativity from antiquity to the present day through the preservation, study, and interpretation of a dynamic and growing collection.
To make the mind more curious, the heart more open, and the spirit more joyful through excellent audio programming that is deeply rooted in new york.
Manhattan university is an independent catholic instituion of higher learning that embraces qualified men and women of all faiths, cultures, and traditions. the mission of manhattan university is to provide a contemporary, person-centered…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The New York Public Library Astor Lenox and Tilden Foundations and the most unlike its peers is The Eye Cancer Foundation 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 48 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% 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 11% 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.
66 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. 66 of the 168 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 LINCOLN CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds Museum of Modern Art ↗
- Who funds THE URBAN DOVE INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds FILM AT LINCOLN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE MOUNT SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK CARES INC ↗
- Who funds ROBIN HOOD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE NEW 42ND STREET INC ↗
- Who funds MAMA FOUNDATION FOR THE ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds The Eye Cancer Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN WESTCHESTER HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds JEWISH BOARD OF FAMILY & CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds FEEDING WESTCHESTER INC ↗
- Who funds New York University ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL CENTER OF PHOTOGRAPHY ↗
- Who funds CSC REPERTORY LTD D/B/A CLASSIC STAGE COMPANY ↗
- Who funds UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds VISITING NURSE SERVICE 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: Jewish Communal Fund · The Bessemer Giving Fund · Stuart and Nicole Kovensky Family Foundation · Ira M Resnick Foundation Inc · Cornelia T Bailey Charitable Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation
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 Nina W Werblow Charitable Trust 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.
- The Aldrich Contemporary Art Museum Inc — 9% of income from government
- The Bottom Line 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Nina W Werblow Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to Nina W Werblow Charitable Trust 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.