Skip to content

· Private foundation

R & S Rappaport Family Foundation Attn Robert Rappaport

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.

$35k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$94kHealth$92kPhilanthropy$25kHuman Services$25kAnimals$11kCrime & Legal$700Other$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$652k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEMPLE ISRAEL$12,666
MINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTE$8,000
MINNESOTA JCC$5,150
STEP$5,000
SALVATION ARMY$2,844
INDIAN LAND TENURE FOUNDATION$1,000
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$500
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 (FY25–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%INDIAN LAND TENURE FOUNDATION: $1k → 14%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.
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$235k · 8 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
8

Total granted

$235k
$17k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+46%

Still filing today

38%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHealthOther
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

  • HAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUNDATION
    4× · 2017–2020 · $40k · revenue +24%
  • MH
    MINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTE FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2021 · $23k · revenue +29%
  • MJ
    MINNESOTA JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER
    3× · 2017–2025 · $16k · revenue +147%

Funded once

  • AH
    ANIMAL HAVEN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +46%
  • MJ
    MINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $4k
  • SP
    ST PAUL & MN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
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
Minnesota Medical Association

To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.

—
2
Michigan Humane Society

To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.

Animals
3
American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation

The mission of the akc canine health foundation, inc. is to fund, advance, and communicate canine health research and science through knowledge and discovery.

Animals
4
Animal Care Sanctuary

Animal care sanctuary's lifesaving mission as a no kill organization envisions a community that promotes turning compassion into action for companion animals by: 1.) adopting healthy pet companions into loving homes. 2.) promoting the…

Animals
5
Minnesota Council on Foundations

MCF is a vibrant philanthropic community connecting, strengthening and mobilizing the power of philanthropy to advance prosperity and equity.

—
6
Midlands Humane Society

To protect and nurture companion animals and enrich the lives of people who love them.

Animals
7
The Humane Society for Seattleking County

Seattle humane promotes the human-animal bond by saving and serving pets in need, regardless of age, ability, circumstance or geography.

Animals
8
Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The primary mission of the humane society is to end animal cruelty, neglect and overpopulation in south carolina.

Animals
9
The Minneapolis Foundation

The foundation cultivates generosity by taking action on the greatest civic, social, and economic needs partnering with nonprofits, facilitating grantmaking, driving research and advocacy, and providing services to donors seeking to make a…

Philanthropy
10
Minnesota Hospital Association

Advance the health of individuals and communities through leadership, advocacy and collaboration on behalf of minnesota hospitals and health systems. vision: minnesotans are healthy and have access to the right care at the right time in…

Community Improvement
11
Minnesota Jewish Community Center Foundation

The minnesota jcc foundation's sole purpose is to support the minnesota jcc.

Human Services
12
Animal Humane Society Veterinary Centers Pc

Provide wellness and spay/neuter services at reduced cost for people in need.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Spring Farm Sanctuary. 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, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 20 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
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TEMPLE ISRAEL: $74,916 · OtherTEMPLE ISRAELMINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTE: $29,000 · OtherMINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTEIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMINNESOTA JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $16,150 · OtherMINNESOTA JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTERSALVATION ARMY: $7,754 · Other+6 more: $11,300 · Other+6 moreHAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUNDATION: $40,000 · HealthHAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUND…MINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTE FOUNDATION: $22,500 · HealthMINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITU…+1 more: $500 · HealthMINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $24,100 · PhilanthropyMINNEAPOL…ANIMAL HAVEN INC: $10,000 · AnimalsSPRING FARM SANCTUARY: $500 · Animals+1 more: $200 · AnimalsINDIAN LAND TENURE FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Human Services
Other$184,120Health$63,000Philanthropy$24,100Animals$10,700Human Services$1,000

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 budgetHAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION: $24,100 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTE FOUNDATION: $22,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMINNESOTA JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $16,150 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetANIMAL HAVEN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSPRING FARM SANCTUARY: $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAnimal Humane Society: $200 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds HAZELDEN BETTY FORD FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MINNEAPOLIS JEWISH FEDERATION ↗
  • Who funds MINNEAPOLIS HEART INSTITUTE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MINNESOTA JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL HAVEN INC ↗
  • Who funds INDIAN LAND TENURE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SPRING FARM SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds Animal Humane Society ↗

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.

National Philanthropic TrustPA9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 R & S Rappaport Family Foundation Attn Robert Rappaport funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from R & S Rappaport Family Foundation Attn Robert Rappaport. 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%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 20 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 R & S Rappaport Family Foundation Attn Robert Rappaport’s filings →

    More from the funding graph