· Private foundation
Philip & Myn Rootberg 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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k38 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $27k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LOS ANGELES OPERA | $15,479 |
| JEWISH UNITED FUND | $12,000 |
| TRUSTEES OF TUFTS COLLEGE | $4,200 |
| FOLK ARTS RAJASTHAN | $3,000 |
| MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING | $1,500 |
| AMHERST CINEMA | $1,500 |
| AUTISM SPEAKS | $1,500 |
| AMERICAN FILM INSTITUTE | $1,500 |
| AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY | $1,400 |
| SMILE TRAIN | $1,400 |
| HARTSBROOK SCHOOL | $1,200 |
| UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS COLLEGE OF MEDICINE (HOWARD TESSLER ENDOWMENT FUND) | $1,200 |
| NEW ENGLAND PUBLIC MEDIA | $1,100 |
| NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY | $1,000 |
| WNET - 13 | $1,000 |
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 (FY19–24, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 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.
55 repeat relationships — 36 still active in FY2024, 19 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, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k 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
- JUJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO6× · 2019–2024 · $72k · revenue +57%
Trustees of Tufts College6× · 2019–2024 · $24k · revenue +26%
SMILE TRAIN INC6× · 2019–2024 · $9k · revenue +26%
Funded once
- PPPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICAone grant, 2019 · $5k
- TITEMPLE ISRAEL OF HOLLYWOODone grant, 2019 · $5k
- HUHEBREW UNION COLLEGE-JEWISH INSTITUTE OF RELIGIONone grant, 2019 · $5k
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.
Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.
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.
Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…
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."
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
To accelerate the development of breakthrough discoveries that will transform the lives of people living with food allergies.
Brightfocus foundation funds exceptional research worldwide to defeat alzheimer's disease, macular degeneration, and glaucoma and provides expert information on these heartbreaking diseases. please refer to schedule o for a complete…
The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
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;…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Philharmonic Symphony Society of Ny Inc and the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels. 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 44 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.
51 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. 51 of the 75 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 JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds FOLK ARTS RAJASTHAN INC ↗
- Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds AUTISM SPEAKS INC ↗
- Who funds AMHERST CINEMA ARTS CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds SHARE OUR STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
- Who funds ONE FAIR WAGE INC ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK PUBLIC RADIO ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Parkinson Research Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND PUBLIC MEDIA INC ↗
- Who funds Lyric Opera of Chicago ↗
- Who funds THE PHILHARMONIC SYMPHONY SOCIETY OF NY INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds PARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE FOOD BANK OF WESTERN MASSACHUSETTS INC ↗
- Who funds SURVIVAL CENTERS INC ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds Macular Degeneration Association ↗
- Who funds SHAKESPEARE & COMPANY INC ↗
- Who funds FELDENKRAIS GUILD OF NORTH AMERICA ↗
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: Community Foundation of Western Massachusetts · Select Equity Group Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving 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 Philip & Myn Rootberg 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.
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Survival Centers Inc — 9% of income from government
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
- Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts Inc — 3% of income from government
- Boston Lyric Opera Company — 3% of income from government
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- Amherst Cinema Arts Center Inc — 1% of income from government
- Shakespeare & Company Inc — 1% of income from government
- New England Public Media 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 Philip & Myn Rootberg Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Philip & Myn Rootberg 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.