· Private foundation
Rossman Family 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k7 grants · $29k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $214k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $320k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CIVIC LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION | $180,000 |
| CHILDREN'S PLACE INTERNATIONAL | $90,000 |
| AMERICAN EXCHANGE PROJECT | $50,000 |
| EDUCATION REIMAGINED | $34,000 |
| ALBANY PARK THEATER PROJECT | $30,000 |
| CHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA - WBEZ | $25,000 |
| NEW DEAL FORUM | $25,000 |
| COMPASSION & CHOICES | $25,000 |
| LEAD GUITAR | $20,000 |
| TIDES FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| TURNOUT ACTIVISM | $10,000 |
| THE SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER | $10,000 |
| THE NORA PROJECT | $10,000 |
| HOPEWELL FUND | $10,000 |
| ACCELERATE CHANGE | $7,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $219k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 99% 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.
25 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $22k 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
- CCCOMPASSION & CHOICES5× · 2019–2024 · $215k · revenue +73%
- TPTHE POSSE FOUNDATION INC6× · 2017–2023 · $205k · revenue +49%
- TNTHE NEWDEAL FORUM7× · 2018–2024 · $175k · revenue +390%
Funded once
- FSFull Spectrum Features NFPgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $75k · revenue +148%
- CCCHICAGO CONSORTIUM FOR COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT - UICone grant, 2021 · $50k
- BCBRAZIL CHILD HEALTH INCone grant, 2019 · $35k · revenue -31%
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.
The chicago public education fund (the fund) is a nonprofit organization that improves public schools in chicago by investing in the talented educators who lead them.
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 american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
To create and inspire better ways to give every student an educational foundation for lifelong success. we imagine a world where every student attends a school that meets them where they are, adapts to the unique ways they learn, and…
See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…
The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…
Ai4all's mission is to ensure that the next generation of ai leaders reflects humanity. ai4all is transforming the pipeline of ai practitioners who will shape ai for the benefit of humanity.
Issue one is the leading crosspartisan political reform organization that educates the public, engages capitol hill, and advocates for solutions to fix our broken political system.
Making our government work better is a daunting task, and we are a small organization seeking to transform a government that employs millions of civilians and manages trillions of dollars in taxpayer revenue needed to protect public…
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
Advocating for public policies that advance democratic values in the digital age.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Working America Education Fund and the most unlike its peers is American Diabetes Association. 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 21 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
32 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. 32 of the 49 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 CIVIC LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMPASSION & CHOICES ↗
- Who funds THE POSSE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE NEWDEAL FORUM ↗
- Who funds LEAD GUITAR ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO PUBLIC MEDIA INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds EDUCATION REIMAGINED ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN EXCHANGE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Full Spectrum Features NFP ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Albany Park Theater Project ↗
- Who funds BRAZIL CHILD HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds CONVERGENCE CENTER FOR POLICY RESOLUTION ↗
- Who funds HOPEWELL FUND ↗
- Who funds University of Arizona Foundation ↗
- Who funds THIRD WAY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE NORA PROJECT ↗
- Who funds The Chicago Community Trust ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds Touchstones Discussion Project Inc ↗
- Who funds TURNOUT ACTIVISM INC ↗
- Who funds INFINITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOREFRONT ↗
- Who funds ONE MILLION DEGREES ↗
- Who funds WORKMONEY FOUNDATION 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: Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · Jewish Federation of Metropolitan Chicago · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · American Gift Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Boston Foundation Inc · Impactassetsinc
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 Rossman Family 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.
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% 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 Rossman Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Rossman Family 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.