· Private foundation
Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $2k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $52k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SIDE3 INC | $25,000 |
| HEBREW UNION COLLEGE | $16,666 |
| BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| ARNOLD P GOLD FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $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 (FY19–19, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 18% of Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $54k 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
FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC4× · 2019–2024 · $275k · revenue +62%
MEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC4× · 2019–2024 · $136k · revenue +148%- TUThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum2× · 2019–2020 · $75k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- JSJOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE ATone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +3%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $13k
HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFEgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $12k · revenue +41%
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.
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.
Young judaea is a diverse community that educates and empowers jewish youth to deeply engage with israel and to lead positive change for the jewish people, israel and the world.
Cjl partners with students and other members of the princeton community to sustain and grow a welcoming, multi-faceted and pluralistic jewish community that is fully-integrated into the fabric of campus life and which provides personally…
Jcrc-ny builds relationships to advance the values, interests and security of the new york jewish community and to create a more interconnected new york for all.
To prepare students for the rabbinate and to issue the traditional certificate of ordination in connection therewith. the seminary is authorized to confer the degree of master of hebrew literature (m.h.l.), doctor of hebrew literature…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family Service of Metrowest Inc and the most unlike its peers is Marlene Nathan Meyerson Family Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 32 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 29 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 FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC ↗
- Who funds MEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
- Who funds JOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DBA JEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ↗
- Who funds SIDE3 INC ↗
- Who funds HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE ↗
- Who funds BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds American Friends of Bet Morasha ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL HAVEN INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF METROWEST INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF THE BERKSHIRES ↗
- Who funds ZIONESS MOVEMENT INC ↗
- Who funds BERKSHIRE GROWN INC ↗
- Who funds MARLENE NATHAN MEYERSON FAMILY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LIBERTY SCIENCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE ARNOLD GOLD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BERKSHIRE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds CITY GREEN 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: Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Metrowest NJ · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust 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.
- City Green Inc — 100% of income from government
- Berkshire Grown Inc — 28% of income from government
- Liberty Science Center — 14% 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 Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust 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.