Skip to content
Rind Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Rind Family Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$176k
Granted FY2021
12
Grants FY2021
2
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Rind Family Foundation’s FY2023 grant dollars went to Schwab Charitable Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 2 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Rind Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 8 organizations, $176k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

6
’19
8
’20
8
’21
2
’22
2
’23

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2023.

Philanthropy$2.7MReligion$61kHuman Services$55kPublic Safety & Disaster$35kInternational$24kArts & Culture$5kEducation$5kHealth$4kOther$0
02FY2021 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $47,200, the rows itemized in this filing. The $175,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $128,300 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k10 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $26k
$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Jewish Family Services$15,000
Stroum Jewish Community Ctr$11,100
Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle$5,000
UW Foundation$5,000
Temple De Hirsch Sinai$3,600
Seattle Times For Those in Need$2,000
Athlete Ally, Inc.$1,000
Little Bit Therapeutic Riding Center$1,000
Jewish Family Services$1,000
Stanwood Camano Food Bank$1,000
UJA Federation New York$1,000
Holocaust Center for Humanity$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 (FY19–23, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, 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%Jewish Family Services: $7k → 9%Jewish Family Services: $7k → 9%Jewish Family Services: $4k → 9%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 76% of Rind Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 32% of the giving stays in WA; by stated purpose, 12%.

Rind Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 21% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$143k · 8 repeat orgs$59k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2021, 3 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
9

Total granted

$143k
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+78%

Still filing today

63%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23
HealthRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesCivil RightsFood & NutritionAnimalsOther
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

  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE
    5× · 2019–2023 · $54k · revenue +121%
  • HC
    Holocaust Center For Humanity
    3× · 2019–2021 · $2k · revenue +63%
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $2k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
  • AL
    Anti-Defamation League PNW
    one grant, 2019 · $1k
  • CW
    Canines With a Cause
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue -40%
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
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
2
The Shalom Hartman Institute of North America

The shalom hartman institute (shi) is a leading research and educational center serving israel and world jewry. we work to enrich the moral and spiritual life of israel and the jewish people, deepen the commitment to pluralism and israel's…

International
3
Aclu of Washington Endowment Fund

To protect and extend civil liberties and civil rights by supporting the aclu-wa foundation.

—
4
Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles

We steward $1.5 billion in charitable assets through donor-advised funds, endowments, and other giving vehicles. partnering with 1,400 individuals, families, and organizations, we build enduring legacies and multigenerational impact. in…

Philanthropy
5
Jewish Coalition for Immigrant Justice Northwest

The jewish coalition builds a jewish voice in the pacific northwest advancing immigrant justice and domestic policy, following the leadership of impacted community.

Human Services
6
The Jewish Agency for Israel

The jewish agency binds jews across ideologies and civilizations together in a worldwide jewish family with israel at its center. it provides the global framework for aliyah, ensures global jewish safety, strengthens jewish identity and…

—
7
Minneapolis Jewish Federation

Minneapolis jewish federation is a nonprofit organization that promotes a culture of philanthropy, leverages resources to meet local and global jewish needs, and facilitates community planning to ensure a thriving and secure future.

Philanthropy
8
Sandler Foundation

The foundation operates exclusively for charitable, educational or religious purposes by conducting or supporting activities for the benefit of, or to carry out the purposes of the jewish community federation of san francisco, the…

Philanthropy
9
American Friends of Hebrew University Inc

Support the hebrew univ. of jerusalem, israel's foremost center of higher edu. & research.

International
10
Jewish Federation Council of Greater La

Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…

Philanthropy
11
American Jewish Committee

AJC's mission is to enhance the wellbeing of the Jewish people and Israel, and to advance human rights and democratic values in the United States and around the world. In pursuit of this mission, AJC advances democratic principles, fights…

Civil Rights
12
Jumpstart Labs Inc Dba Jewish Jumpstart Jslabs

To develop, strengthen, and learn from nonprofit, philanthropic, public, as well as other projects, organizations, and networks that benefit society by advancing civic engagement, community-building, culture, education, religion, service,…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc; the most unlike its peers is Shadhika Project. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 27 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
14/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $853,490 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INCJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER SEATTLE: $630,662 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER SEATTLEIMPACTASSETSINC: $607,662 · PhilanthropyIMPACTASSETSINCMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC: $587,662 · PhilanthropyMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC+1 more: $1,000 · PhilanthropyStroum Jewish Community Ctr: $38,600 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $35,000 · OtherShadhika Project: $24,100 · OtherTEMPLE DE HIRSCH SINAI: $11,600 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $8,912 · Other+9 more: $7,250 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $54,200 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $1,500 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $1,000 · HealthSTANWOOD-CAMANO FOOD BANK SERVICES: $2,000 · Food & NutritionLITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER: $1,000 · Recreation & SportsATHLETE ALLY INC: $1,000 · Recreation & Sports
Philanthropy$2,680,476Other$135,712Human Services$54,200Education$5,000Health$2,500Food & Nutrition$2,000Recreation & Sports$2,000

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 budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $853,490 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER SEATTLE: $630,662 over 4y, 6.3% of budgetIMPACTASSETSINC: $607,662 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC: $587,662 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $54,200 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetShadhika Project: $24,100 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHolocaust Center For Humanity: $2,200 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSTANWOOD-CAMANO FOOD BANK SERVICES: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCanines With a Cause: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetATHLETE ALLY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHillel Foundation for Jewish Life at the University of Washington: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $250 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.

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.

Seattle FoundationR & H Rosen Family Fo…Howard and Frances Ke…Tillie & Alfred Shema…Samis FoundationGs Donor Advised Phil…Morgan Stanley Global…The Blackbaud Giving …The Pfizer Foundation…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…National Philanthropi…
Seattle FoundationWA14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · R & H Rosen Family Foundation · Howard and Frances Keller Family Foundation · Tillie & Alfred Shemanski Testamentary Trust · Samis Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Rind Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rind Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 27 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Rind 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