· Private foundation
Roslyn & Joseph Perlman Foundation
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 FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k116 grants · $68k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $40k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| J STREET EDUCATION FUND | $30,000 |
| TAC (TREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER) | $10,000 |
| CONGREGATION HAKAFA | $6,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $6,000 |
| HADASSAH | $5,000 |
| GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY | $3,000 |
| NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK | $3,000 |
| WBEZ | $3,000 |
| WTTW | $3,000 |
| RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION | $2,500 |
| WELLESLEY COLLEGE | $2,500 |
| SAVE THE CHILDREN | $2,500 |
| SKOKIE VALLEY AGUDATH JACOB SYNAGOGUE | $2,300 |
| NORTH SHORE MUSICIAN'S CLUB | $2,000 |
| HIGHLAND PARK COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
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 (FY20–25, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 80% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
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 +39% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
118 repeat relationships — 106 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 10 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, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $540 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
- JSJ STREET EDUCATION FUND INC6× · 2020–2025 · $125k · revenue +61%
- TATREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER6× · 2020–2025 · $60k · revenue +45%
- TTTHE THRESHOLDS6× · 2020–2025 · $51k · revenue +46%
Funded once
- WCWELLESLEY COLLEGE HILLEL FRIENDS OFone grant, 2020 · $3k
- TVTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTERone grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue -34%
- BSBIG SHOTS BASKETBALLone grant, 2020 · $2k
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.
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;…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
The committee to protect journalists promotes press freedom worldwide and defends the right of journalists to report the news safely and without fear of reprisal. cpj ensures the free flow of news and commentary by taking action wherever…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
The federation for american immigration reform's (fair) mission is to educate the public about the economic, sociological, environmental, demographic and other effects of mass immigration to the united states.
Crisis group works to prevent and resolve deadly conflict around the world by informing and influencing the perceptions and actions of policymakers and other key conflict actors. to this end, we endeavour to talk to all sides and provide…
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Immigration Law Center and the most unlike its peers is Savoy Aires. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 45 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% 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.
107 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. 107 of the 152 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 J STREET EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds TREATMENT ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE THRESHOLDS ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds Highland Park Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds Wellesley College ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds RAVINIA FESTIVAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE GREEN BAY TRAIL ↗
- Who funds LET'S GET READY INC ↗
- Who funds WINDOW TO THE WORLD COMMUNICATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds LAKE COUNTY CRISIS CENTER ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
- Who funds FEED THE CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger ↗
- Who funds REFUGEEONE ↗
- Who funds FINCA INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds SHALVA INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds American College of Preventive Medicine ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO CHESS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
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: Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · The Chicago Community Trust · Walter and Karla Goldschmidt Foundation · Circle of Service Foundation · Irving & Marilyn Naiditch Family Foundation · Evanston Community Foundation · First Bank Chicago Foundation · Lloyd a Fry Foundation · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Jewish Communal Fund
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 Roslyn & Joseph Perlman Foundation 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Hias Inc — 88% of income from government
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- National Yiddish Book Center Inc — 2% of income from government
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- Wellesley College — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% 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.