Skip to content
Robert R Nathan Philanthropic Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Robert R Nathan Philanthropic Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$25k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Recreation & Sports$175kEducation$136kArts & Culture$125kHuman Services$102kYouth Development$82kPublic Benefit$80kCommunity Improvement$16kHealth$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $4k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $21k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$253k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TRANSPORTATION INTERMEDIARIES ASSOCIATION$11,000
HOPE CHICAGO$10,000
MIDWEST FASTENER ASSOCIATION$2,500
MURPHSLIFE FOUNDATION$1,500
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 (FY20–25, $97k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 8% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MURPHSLIFE FOUNDATION: $100 → 8%MURPHSLIFE FOUNDATION: $2k → 8%LOAVES AND FISHES: $2k → 10%KRAMERICA GIVES: $86k → 10%YWCA Metropolitan Chicago: $8k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

ID
MN
IL
NY
MA
PA
CT
UT
CO
NE
VA
FL
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.

20%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$153k · 4 repeat orgs$595k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +76% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
31

Total granted

$153k
$581k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+76%
+19%

Still filing today

75%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesRecreation & SportsCommunity ImprovementHealthPublic BenefitEducationOther
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

  • HM
    Holocaust Museum
    4× · 2020–2023 · $100k
  • HC
    HOPE CHICAGO INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $50k · revenue +80%
  • MF
    MURPHSLIFE FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2025 · $2k · revenue -46%

Funded once

  • B
    BLACKPACKERSgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $90k · revenue +41%
  • KG
    KRAMERICA GIVES
    one grant, 2023 · $86k · revenue +25% · 56% of their budget
  • VE
    Veterans Expeditions Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $80k · revenue -48% · 39% of their budget
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
Aerial Recovery

Aerial recovery's mission is to save lives and stop evil. through the creation and deployment of humanitarian special operators, aerial recovery brings together selected veterans, first responders, and mission-qualified civilians who,…

—
2
Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago

Federation amplifies our collective strength to make the world a better place for everyone. we assist people in need, impact chicagoans of all faiths; support israel and the jewish people worldwide; respond swiftly to crises; cultivate…

Philanthropy
3
World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals

To boldly engage the world's greatest crises in partnership with the church.

International
4
Hunger Free America Inc

Hunger free america (hfa) is a nonpartisan, national nonprofit organization building the movement to enact the policies and programs needed to end domestic hunger and ensure that all americans have sufficient access to nutritious food.

—
5
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
6
Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition

The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…

Food & Nutrition
7
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
8
Refugees International Inc

Refugees international advocates for lifesaving assistance, human rights, and protection for displaced people and promotes solutions to displacement crisis.

International
9
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
10
Women's Refugee Commission Inc

To improve the lives and protect the rights of women, children and youth displaced by conflict and crisis. the women's refugee commission envisions a world in which refugees are safe, healthy and reliant and seeks to drive change in…

Human Services
11
International Youth Foundation

Iyf is a global ngo that prepares young people to be healthy, productive and engaged citizens.

International
12
Food and Environment Reporting Network Inc

Fern seeks to make the food system more sustainable and equitable through powerful journalism and storytelling.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Change Starts With Me; the most unlike its peers is Fab 5 Foundation Attn Jon Michelon. 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

25 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. 25 of the 37 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/25
Grantees still filing
18/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Holocaust Museum: $100,000 · OtherHolocaust MuseumHOPE CHICAGO INC: $50,000 · OtherHOPE CHICAGO INCUNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MUSEUM: $25,000 · OtherUNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MUSEUMTransportation Intermediaries Association: $11,000 · Other+21 more: $42,747 · Other+21 moreBLACKPACKERS: $90,239 · Recreation & SportsBLACKPACKERSBIG CITY MOUNTAINEERS: $80,000 · Recreation & SportsBIG CITY MOUNTAINEERS+1 more: $5,000 · Recreation & SportsKRAMERICA GIVES: $85,500 · Human ServicesKRAMERICA GIVE…YWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $8,000 · Human ServicesYWCA METROPOLI…+2 more: $3,887 · Human ServicesVeterans Expeditions Inc: $80,000 · Public BenefitVeterans Exp…OUTDOOR LAB FOUNDATION: $80,000 · EducationOUTDOOR LAB …LINCOLN HILLS CARES: $79,500 · Arts & CultureLINCOLN HILL…MICHAEL REESE HEALTH TRUST: $5,000 · HealthRAISE THE BAR INC: $1,500 · Health
Other$228,747Recreation & Sports$175,239Human Services$97,387Public Benefit$80,000Education$80,000Arts & Culture$79,500Health$6,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBLACKPACKERS: $90,239 over 1y, 23% of budgetKRAMERICA GIVES: $85,500 over 1y, 56% of budgetVeterans Expeditions Inc: $80,000 over 1y, 39% of budgetOUTDOOR LAB FOUNDATION: $80,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetBIG CITY MOUNTAINEERS: $80,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetLINCOLN HILLS CARES: $79,500 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetHOPE CHICAGO INC: $50,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTransportation Intermediaries Association: $11,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetYWCA METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAB 5 FOUNDATION ATTN JON MICHELON: $5,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetThe Cara Program: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOAVES & FISHES INC: $2,287 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMURPHSLIFE FOUNDATION: $1,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetClimbing Wall Association Inc: $1,240 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSLEEP IN HEAVENLY PEACE INC: $1,060 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLife After Hate Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBAL EMPOWERMENT MISSION INC: $910 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD BANK FOR NEW YORK CITY: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $50 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.

The Denver FoundationColorado Gives Founda…The Blackbaud Giving …The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Denver FoundationCO14.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Denver Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 R Nathan Philanthropic Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Robert R Nathan Philanthropic Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Global Empowerment Mission Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 R Nathan Philanthropic Fund?

Find your warmest path to Robert R Nathan Philanthropic Fund 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 37 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 R Nathan Philanthropic’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