· Private foundation
Ravitch-Wolfe Family 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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
95% of Ravitch-Wolfe Family Foundation’s FY2023 grant dollars went to National Philanthropic Trust, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Ravitch-Wolfe Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $350k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2022
- $10k–50k6 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $235k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE BROTHERHOOD SISTER SOL | $185,000 |
| ISRAAID (US) GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC | $50,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | $35,000 |
| WELLESLEY COLLEGE | $20,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $20,000 |
| THE SYLVIA CENTER | $15,000 |
| MAYO CLINIC CONTRIBUTION ACCOUNT | $15,000 |
| NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
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 (FY18–18, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
14 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2022, 10 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k 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
THE BROTHERHOOD SISTER SOL INC4× · 2018–2022 · $303k · revenue +34%- OCOCEAN CONSERVANCY4× · 2018–2021 · $135k · revenue +31%
- IRInternational Rescue Committee INC5× · 2018–2022 · $105k · revenue +80%
Funded once
- YUYALE UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENTone grant, 2019 · $75k
- IPISRAEL POLICY FORUM INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +128%
- HIHIAS INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue +180%
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.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Crisis group works to prevent and resolve deadly conflict around the world by informing and influencing the perceptions and actions of policymakers and other key conflict actors. to this end, we endeavour to talk to all sides and provide…
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
The organization's mission is to engage in non partisan analysis of u.s. foreign policy in the middle east, with special emphasis on the middle east peace process, and to present policymakers in the united states, in the region and in the…
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
Ilsi is a global, nonprofit federation dedicated to generating and advancing emerging science and groundbreaking research to ensure foods are safe, nutritious and sustainable, and that they improve planetary and human health and well-being…
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
Organization mission the observer research foundation america orf america is an independent, non-partisan, and nonprofit organization in washington dc dedicated to addressing policy challenges facing the united states, india, and their…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Nrgi envisions a world where natural resources enable fair, prosperous and sustainable societies, instead of undermining them. nrgi exists because decisions about how natural resources are governed determine the well-being of people in…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Philanthropic Trust 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 39 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.
27 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. 27 of the 35 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 DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST ↗
- Who funds THE BROTHERHOOD SISTER SOL INC ↗
- Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds THE SYLVIA CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ISRAAID US GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC ↗
- Who funds NEXT FOR AUTISM INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds BARNARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AGAHOZO-SHALOM YOUTH VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL POLICY FORUM INC ↗
- Who funds THE COLORADO COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds PICO UNION PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Wellesley College ↗
- Who funds HIAS INC ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds COMMITTEE TO PROTECT JOURNALISTS INC ↗
- Who funds SKY'S THE LIMIT FUND ↗
- Who funds RARE ↗
- Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Eye Cancer Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds ABRAHAM JOSHUA HESCHEL SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds RIVERSIDE PARK CONSERVANCY INC ↗
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: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Ravitch-Wolfe Family 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Hias Inc — 88% of income from government
- Wellesley College — 1% 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 Ravitch-Wolfe Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Ravitch-Wolfe Family 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.