· Private foundation
Rothstein Foundation Inc
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $3,000 |
| LOVING SPOONFULS | $2,500 |
| MOVEMENT VOTERS FUND (CO TIDES FUND) | $2,000 |
| ROSIE'S PLACE | $2,000 |
| FORCE MULTIPLIER'S DEM IN ACTION FUND (CO AMALGAMATED FUND) | $2,000 |
| MASSACHUSETTS ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN | $1,500 |
| THE WELCOME PROJECT | $1,500 |
| ACCESS REPRODUCTION CARE SOUTHEAST | $1,500 |
| BERKSHIRE IMMIGRANT CENTER | $1,500 |
| LEWY BODY DEMENTIA ASSOCIATION | $1,000 |
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 (FY23–24, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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 +31% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 4 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, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
- RPROSIE'S PLACE INC5× · 2020–2024 · $10k · revenue +39%
- GBGREATER BOSTON FOOD BANK INC5× · 2017–2022 · $8k · revenue +89%
- SSPOONFULS4× · 2021–2024 · $8k · revenue +31%
Funded once
CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INCone grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +10%- WCWORLD CENTRAL KITCHENone grant, 2020 · $2k
- AIACT Institute Incone grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue -3%
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.
Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…
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.
Aclu foundation of ma was established to defend freedoms guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights through public education and litigation.
Bridgespan's mission is to build a better world by strengthening the ability of mission-driven organizations and philanthropists to achieve breakthrough results in addressing society's most important challenges and opportunities.
The mission of the roundtable is to make massachusetts the most desirable place to live, work and do business by engaging private sector executives and public leaders to ensure access to a robust, diverse and talented workforce that…
Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
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…
U.s. digital response is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that helps governments, nonprofits, and public entities respond quickly to critical public needs. the organization serves the public by leveraging a network of pro bono…
To develop and promote a carbon dividends framework - based on carbon fees whose revenues are rebated to citizens through dividends - as the most cost-effective, equitable, and politically viable climate solution.
The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s. approach to foreign policy. through…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is We the Protesters Inc and the most unlike its peers is Project Drawdown. 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 35 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 5% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
41 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. 41 of the 55 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 ROSIE'S PLACE INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER BOSTON FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds SPOONFULS ↗
- Who funds GREATER BOSTON LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds THE WELCOME PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE CARE - SOUTHEAST ↗
- Who funds OUR RESTORATIVE JUSTICE INC ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds CAIR-FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds BOSTON BAROQUE INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds BERKSHIRE IMMIGRANT CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds LEGACY LIVES ON INC ↗
- Who funds WE THE PROTESTERS INC ↗
- Who funds PRO PUBLICA INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC ↗
- Who funds JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY LIBRARY FOUNDATION INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds DEMENTIA ACTION ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds ACT Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds Acadia Center ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds RESIST INC ↗
- Who funds Movement Generation ↗
- Who funds LAS AMERICAS IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds VOLUNTEER LEGAL ADVOCATES ↗
- Who funds Center for Arms Control and ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds THE SOLAR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BROOKLINE EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
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: Barr Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Burkehaven Family Foundation · Boston Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation
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 Rothstein Foundation Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Greater Boston Food Bank Inc — 22% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Berkshire Immigrant Center Inc — 9% of income from government
- The Welcome Project Inc — 4% of income from government
- Greater Boston Legal Services Inc — 3% of income from government
- Boston Baroque Inc — 2% of income from government
- Resist Inc — 2% of income from government
- Rosie's Place Inc — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Rothstein Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Rothstein Foundation Inc 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.