Skip to content
Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust at a glance

· 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.

$54k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Youth Development$275kInternational$179kReligion$92kArts & Culture$75kPhilanthropy$35kEducation$18kAnimals$10kHuman Services$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $2k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $52k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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 (FY19–19, $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. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF METROWEST: $8k → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NH
NY
MA
OH
NJ
CT
CO
NE
DC
TX
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 18% of Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trustlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$486k · 3 repeat orgs$191k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +131% since the first grant, against +28% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
18

Total granted

$486k
$138k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+131%
+28%

Still filing today

100%
61%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $54k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’24’25
InternationalReligionArts & CultureEnvironmentYouth DevelopmentAnimalsOther
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

  • FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC
    4× · 2019–2024 · $275k · revenue +131%
  • MEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2019–2024 · $136k · revenue +148%
  • TU
    The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
    2× · 2019–2020 · $75k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • JS
    JOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +3%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $13k
  • HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFEgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $12k · revenue +41%
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
Bar Ilan University in Israel Inc

Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.

—
2
The Jewish Museum

The mission of the jewish museum is to collect, preserve, exhibit and interpret art and jewish culture. see schedule o for more information.

Arts & Culture
3
Young Judaea Global Inc

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.

Education
4
B'nai Brith Hillel Foundation At Princeton

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…

—
5
Eastern European Jewish Heritage Foundation
Philanthropy
6
The Jerusalem Connection
—
7
Jewish Community Relations Council of New York

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.

Civil Rights
8
University of Judaism Foundation
—
9
The Steinhardt Foundation for Jewish Life Inc
Religion
10
Sherit Isroel
—
11
Bronfman Youth Fellowships to Israel in Inc
Youth Development
12
Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary

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…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family Service of Metrowest Inc; 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.
05the grantee network

20 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. 20 of the 29 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $275,000 · Youth DevelopmentFOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INCMEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC: $136,000 · InternationalMEDIATORS FOUNDATION INCSIDE3 INC: $25,000 · InternationalSIDE3 INCBIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATION: $10,000 · InternationalBIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL FOUNDATIONAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC: $7,500 · InternationalThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $75,000 · Arts & CultureThe United S…+1 more: $1,600 · Arts & CultureJOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT: $50,000 · ReligionJOSEPH SLIF…HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $11,500 · ReligionHILLEL THE …American Friends of Bet Morasha: $10,000 · ReligionAmerican Fr…HEBREW UNION COLLEGE: $16,666 · OtherHEBREW UNIO…Individual grant recipient: $13,000 · OtherIndividual …JOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE: $10,000 · OtherJOSEPH SLIF…TEMPLE NER TAMID: $6,650 · OtherTEMPLE NER …JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF METROWEST INC: $8,000 · OtherJEWISH FAMI…ZIONESS MOVEMENT INC: $5,000 · OtherZIONESS MOV…BERKSHIRE GROWN INC: $2,500 · Other+8 more: $9,020 · Other+8 moreJEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DBA JEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $25,000 · PhilanthropyJEWISH FEDERATION OF THE BERKSHIRES: $7,000 · PhilanthropyMARLENE NATHAN MEYERSON FAMILY FOUNDATION: $2,500 · PhilanthropyANIMAL HAVEN INC: $10,000 · Animals
Youth Development$275,000International$178,500Arts & Culture$76,600Religion$71,500Other$70,836Philanthropy$34,500Animals$10,000

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 budgetFOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMP INC: $275,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetMEDIATORS FOUNDATION INC: $136,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $75,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJOSEPH SLIFKA CENTER FOR JEWISH LIFE AT: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DBA JEWISH FEDERATION OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $25,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetHILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE: $11,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Friends of Bet Morasha: $10,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetANIMAL HAVEN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF METROWEST INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF THE BERKSHIRES: $7,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetZIONESS MOVEMENT INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBERKSHIRE GROWN INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMARLENE NATHAN MEYERSON FAMILY FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLIBERTY SCIENCE CENTER: $1,600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBERKSHIRE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCITY GREEN INC: $1,000 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.

Combined Jewish Phila…Jewish Communal FundJewish Community Foun…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston IncMA18.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 28%
  • City Green Inc: 100% of income from government
  • Berkshire Grown Inc: 28% of income from government
  • Liberty Science Center: 14% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
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.
05Through Plinth

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.

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 29 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 Robert Bildner and Elisa Spungen Bildner’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