· Private foundation
Tabachnick Family 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $7,500 |
| VOICES FOR PROGRESS EDUCATION FUND | $2,500 |
| J STREET EDUCATION FUND | $1,800 |
| MCGILL UNIVERSITY | $1,354 |
| CONGREGATION BETH YAM | $915 |
| PITTSBURGH YOUTH SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA | $750 |
| THE AMERICAN PROSPECT | $650 |
| CONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CE | $500 |
| ACLU OF PENNSYLVANIA | $500 |
| WESTMORELAND FOOD BANK | $475 |
| KEYSTONE PROGRESS EDUCATION FUND | $400 |
| LIGONIER VOLUNTEER HOSE COMPANY | $300 |
| FALLING WATER | $250 |
| MANNA FOOD BANK | $150 |
| PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY | $150 |
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 (FY17–25, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 15% of Tabachnick Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +40% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 4 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, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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 INC9× · 2017–2025 · $50k · revenue +40%
- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC8× · 2017–2024 · $5k · revenue +10%
- TATHE AMERICAN PROSPECT INC3× · 2022–2025 · $2k · revenue +41%
Funded once
- PCPROGRESSIVE CAUCUS CENTERone grant, 2021 · $1k
- CNCleanAIRE NCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $500 · revenue +55%
- IUINSPIRE USone grant, 2019 · $360
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.
Pro publica is an independent, non-profit, pulitzer prize-winning newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories. [see continuation on schedule o] we produce…
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
Organize general election presidential and vice-presidential debates
The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…
Providing research, education and practical information all aimed at optimizing newspapers' business operations, deepening their community engagement and enhancing the quality of their journalism.
Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…
Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…
The world privacy forum is dedicated to reimaging privacy in a digital era through ground-breaking, in-depth privacy research and consumer education of the highest quality. our vision is to empower people with the knowledge, rights, and…
The center for public integrity inspires change using investigative reporting that reveals the causes and effects of inequality. discriminatory systems in employment, housing, health care, education and access to democracy affect people…
National taxpayers union foundation (ntuf) provides crucial, impactful research and analysis showing americans how taxes, government spending, and regulations affect them. with our unique combination of policy expertise, outreach know-how,…
To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…
The center for american progress (cap) is an independent nonpartisan policy institute that is dedicated to improving the lives of all americans through bold, progressive ideas, as well as strong leadership and concerted action. our aim is…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is People for the American Way and the most unlike its peers is Greater Susquehanna Valley Ymca. 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 34 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 52 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 TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds Keystone Research Center Inc ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE AMERICAN PROSPECT INC ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAN WAY ↗
- Who funds ECONOMIC POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF WESTERN PA INC ↗
- Who funds TYPE MEDIA CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds The Women and Girls Foundation of Southwest Pennsylvania ↗
- Who funds CleanAIRE NC ↗
- Who funds KEYSTONE PROGRESS EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER ACTION ↗
- Who funds INSPIRE US ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC CITIZEN INC ↗
- Who funds COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds THE BIRTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds MI FAMILIA EN ACCION ↗
- Who funds Institute for Southern Studies Inc ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER FUND ↗
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: Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · The Ford Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Proteus Fund Inc · Hopewell Fund · Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 Tabachnick 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.
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 Tabachnick Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Tabachnick 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.