Skip to content
Norman and Rosalie Cohen Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Norman and Rosalie Cohen Family 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.

$15k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$28kHuman Services$16kInternational$14kHealth$11kAnimals$9kScience & Tech$3kReligion$2k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,435
Median grant
3
States reached
$250k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Toronto Waldorf School$4,869
Friends of the Israel Defense Forces$4,868
American Health Legal Foundation$2,435
Loving Spay and Neuter Clinic$1,461
Goochland Pet Lovers$974
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.

US giving: 72% of grant dollars ($60k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 28% that went abroad ($24k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY20–23, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 85% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $2k → 6%DRUEDING CENTER: $5k → 22%DRUEDING CENTER: $4k → 22%DRUEDING CENTER: $4k → 22%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

MN
NY
IA
PA
CO
VA
AZ
NM
DC

Beyond the US: 28% of all-years giving ($24k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Canada$24k · 6 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$72k · 7 repeat orgs$12k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
6

Total granted

$72k
$12k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-9%
+16%

Still filing today

71%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesScience & TechInternationalAnimalsHealthEducationOther
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

  • TW
    TORONTO WALDORF SCHOOL
    6× · 2020–2025 · $24k
  • FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES
    3× · 2023–2025 · $14k · revenue -33%
  • DC
    DRUEDING CENTER
    3× · 2020–2022 · $14k · revenue -9%

Funded once

  • CP
    CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE
    one grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue +16%
  • TC
    THE CHURCH OF THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY
    one grant, 2021 · $2k
  • AO
    ASSOCIATION OF WALDORF SCHOOLS OF NORTH AMERICAgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +66%
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
Guttmacher Institute Inc

The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.

—
2
Operational K9 Medical Team of Wisconsin
Animals
3
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc

Protection of animal rights

Animals
4
Parsemus Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Physicians for Palestine
Health
6
Access to Advanced Health Institute

Aahi is a nonprofit biotech research institute, bringing together the best experts, technologies, and platforms to create accessible, high-quality products and solutions for harnessing the immune system to alleviate disease.

Health
7
International Myeloma Foundation

Dedicated to improving the quality of life of myeloma patients while working toward prevention and a cure.

Unclassified
8
American Diabetes Association

The mission of the American Diabetes Association is to prevent and cure diabetes and to improve the lives of all people affected by diabetes.

Health
9
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
10
American Immigration Lawyers Association

The american immigration lawyers association (aila) was established to promote justice, advocate for fair and reasonable immigration law and policy, advance the quality of immigration and nationality law and practice, and enhance the…

—
11
David Lynch Foundation for Consciousness -Based Education and World Peace

The david lynch foundation for consciousness-based education and world peace (the "foundation or "dlf") is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization founded in 2005. the foundation helps to prevent and eradicate the epidemic of trauma and toxic…

Philanthropy
12
American College of Lifestyle Medicine

Mission statement: advancing evidence-based lifestyle medicine to treat, reverse and prevent non-communicable, chronic disease. vision statement: a nation and world wherein lifestyle medicine is the foundation of health and all healthcare.…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Association of Waldorf Schools of North America; the most unlike its peers is Drueding Center. 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

9 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. 9 of the 13 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TORONTO WALDORF SCHOOL: $23,714 · OtherTORONTO WALDORF SCHOOLAMERICAN HEALTH LEGAL FOUNDATION: $9,713 · OtherAMERICAN HEALTH LEGAL FOUNDATIONLOVING SPAY AND NEUTER CLINIC: $4,354 · OtherLOVING SPAY AND NEUTER CLINICTHE CHURCH OF THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY: $2,167 · OtherASSOCIATION OF WALDORF SCHOOLS OF NORTH AMERICA: $2,072 · OtherCAN DO CANINES 2020 FOUNDATION: $2,072 · OtherDRUEDING CENTER: $13,698 · Human ServicesDRUEDING CENTERCANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $2,456 · Human ServicesCANINE PARTNERS FOR L…FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $14,305 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRA…Institute for Responsible Technology: $2,938 · Science & TechGOOCHLAND PET LOVERS: $2,903 · AnimalsINDEPENDENT MEDICAL ALLIANCE: $1,733 · HealthCELLULAR PHONE TASK FORCE INC: $1,733 · Education
Other$44,092Human Services$16,154International$14,305Science & Tech$2,938Animals$2,903Health$1,733Education$1,733

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 budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $14,305 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDRUEDING CENTER: $13,698 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN HEALTH LEGAL FOUNDATION: $9,713 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetInstitute for Responsible Technology: $2,938 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetGOOCHLAND PET LOVERS: $2,903 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $2,456 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetASSOCIATION OF WALDORF SCHOOLS OF NORTH AMERICA: $2,072 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINDEPENDENT MEDICAL ALLIANCE: $1,733 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCELLULAR PHONE TASK FORCE INC: $1,733 over 1y, 1.3% 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Norman and Rosalie Cohen Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Norman and Rosalie Cohen Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 13 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 Norman and Rosalie Cohen Family’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