Skip to content

· Private foundation

Rose & Sherle Wagner 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.

$140k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0175% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$405kCivil Rights$220kYouth Development$195kCrime & Legal$190kEducation$120kCommunity Improvement$80kHealth$40kPhilanthropy$40kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $90k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$15,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$7.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YA-YA NETWORK$50,000
PROJECT EZRA$20,000
Individual grant recipient$20,000
HORIZONS STUDENT ENRICHMENT NATIONAL$15,000
CIRCLE UP YOUTH RESTORATIVE ARTS INC$15,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
WOMEN'S REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ASSISTANCE PROJECT$10,000
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 (FY17–24, $405k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%YA-YA NETWORK: $50k → 17%YA-YA NETWORK: $50k → 17%YA-YA NETWORK: $25k → 17%YA-YA NETWORK: $20k → 17%YA-YA NETWORK: $40k → 17%YA-YA NETWORK: $20k → 17%YA-YA NETWORK: $20k → 17%YA-YA NETWORK: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%PROJECT EZRA: $20k → 17%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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 18 repeat orgs$71k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
5

Total granted

$1.5M
$56k

Still filing today

39%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthCrime & LegalCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • YN
    YA-YA NETWORK INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $245k · revenue +184%
  • GL
    GRASSROOTS LEADERSHIP INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $140k · revenue +12%
  • WR
    Women's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project
    8× · 2017–2024 · $80k · revenue +299%

Funded once

  • CP
    CPC PROJECT REACH
    one grant, 2018 · $20k
  • GF
    GIRLS FOR GENDER EQUALITY
    one grant, 2020 · $15k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
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
Worker Justice Center of New York Inc

Worker Justice Center of New York, Inc. (WJCNY) pusues juistice for those denied hian rights, with a focus on agricultural and other low-wage workers, through legal representation, community empowerment and advocacy for institutional…

Crime & Legal
2
Jews for Racial and Economic Justice Action Inc

Jews For Racial & Economic Justice Action (JFREJ Action or JFREJ) is the home for Jewish New Yorkers organizing with our neighbors and allies to transform New York from a playground for the wealthy few into a real democracy for all of us.…

—
3
Youth Represent Inc

Youth represent uses legal services, policy advocacy, peer education, and other tools to build power and opportunity for black, latine, and other youth of color who the criminal legal system and other systems of oppression harm the most.…

Crime & Legal
4
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
5
Detention Watch Network

Detention Watch Network seeks to end the cruel system of immigration detention via programs of grassroots organizing, strategic communications, and collective advocacy.

Human Services
6
Center for Racial and Gender E Nfp

Workers Rights

Civil Rights
7
Workers Center for Racial Just Nfp

The mission of the Workers Center For Racial Justice is to eliminate structural barriers to sustainable and living wage

Civil Rights
8
Jews for Racial & Economic Justice

Jews For Racial & Economic Justice Community (JFREJ Community) is a 501c3 non-profit organization committed to building a vibrant Jewish left working for social justice in New York City. JFREJ Community grows the New York Jewish Left by…

Civil Rights
9
Fund for Justice

Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…

Crime & Legal
10
Interfaith Worker Justice

To advance the rights of workers by engaging diverse faith communities into action, from grassroots organizing to shaping policy at the local, state and national levels. They envision a nation where all workers enjoy the rights to:…

Religion
11
Social Justice and Solidarity Fund

The Funds mission is to provide sustained support to grassroots organizing projects and movements rooted in the multi-racial working class which rely on their members and constituency to build power in the community.

—
12
New York Jewish Agenda Inc

New york jewish agenda held events and briefings, and worked with elected officials and grass-tops leaders to enact our vision of a socially just new york.

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ya-Ya Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Women's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project. 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

11 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. 11 of the 25 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/11
Grantees still filing
5/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

YOUTH EMPOWERMENT ORGANIZATION INC: $150,000 · OtherYOUTH EMPOWERMENT ORGANIZATION INCIndividual grant recipient: $140,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGRASSROOTS LEADERSHIP INC: $140,000 · OtherGRASSROOTS LEADERSHIP INCHORIZONS STUDENT ENRICHMENT NATIONAL: $120,000 · OtherHORIZONS STUDENT ENRICHMENT NATIONALMid South Peace and Justice Center: $100,000 · OtherMid South Peace and Justice CenterPROJECT REACH: $80,000 · OtherPROJECT REACHIndividual grant recipient: $80,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientNORTH STAR FUND INC: $40,000 · OtherMOVIMIENTO POR JUSTICA EN EL BARRIO: $40,000 · OtherCHINESE AMERICAN PLANNING COUNCILPROJECT REACH: $40,000 · Other+9 more: $131,060 · Other+9 moreYA-YA NETWORK INC: $245,000 · Human ServicesYA-YA NETWORK INCProject Ezra: $160,000 · Human ServicesProject EzraWomen's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project: $80,000 · HealthGIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC: $45,000 · Crime & LegalBrandworkers International Inc: $20,000 · Civil RightsDRUM Desis Rising Up and Moving Inc: $20,000 · Community Improvement
Other$1,061,060Human Services$405,000Health$80,000Crime & Legal$45,000Civil Rights$20,000Community Improvement$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetYA-YA NETWORK INC: $245,000 over 8y, 25% of budgetProject Ezra: $160,000 over 8y, 5.5% of budgetYOUTH EMPOWERMENT ORGANIZATION INC: $150,000 over 2y, 91% of budgetGRASSROOTS LEADERSHIP INC: $140,000 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetMid South Peace and Justice Center: $100,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetWomen's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project: $80,000 over 8y, 4.0% of budgetGIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC: $45,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNORTH STAR FUND INC: $40,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetROCKAWAY YOUTH TASK FORCE INC: $30,000 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetDRUM Desis Rising Up and Moving Inc: $20,000 over 2y, 1.3% 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.

  • Who funds YA-YA NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds Project Ezra ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH EMPOWERMENT ORGANIZATION INC ↗
  • Who funds GRASSROOTS LEADERSHIP INC ↗
  • Who funds Mid South Peace and Justice Center ↗
  • Who funds Women's Reproductive Rights Assistance Project ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTH STAR FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds ROCKAWAY YOUTH TASK FORCE INC ↗
  • Who funds Brandworkers International Inc ↗
  • Who funds DRUM Desis Rising Up and Moving Inc ↗

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.

Amalgamated Charitable Foundation IncDC15× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Sparkplug Foundation · North Star Fund Inc · Brooklyn Community Foundation · Proteus Fund Inc · Borealis Philanthropy · Ben & Jerry's Foundation Inc · The Ford Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors 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 Rose & Sherle Wagner Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rose & Sherle Wagner Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Rose & Sherle Wagner Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Rose & Sherle Wagner 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.

    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 25 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Rose & Sherle Wagner’s filings →

    More from the funding graph