How much does The Adam J Weissman Foundation give?

The Adam J Weissman Foundation reported 21 grants totaling $358,000 in its FY2024 IRS filing. It funded between 25 and 41 organizations a year over FY2019 to FY2023.

What does The Adam J Weissman Foundation fund?

By grant dollars over FY2019 to FY2024, its largest causes are International (41%), Education (23%), Community Improvement (10%).

Who are The Adam J Weissman Foundation's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2019 to FY2024: Ploughshares Fund Inc ($755k), Tessellations ($452k), Heifer Project International ($310k).

Does The Adam J Weissman Foundation fund new organizations?

In FY2023, 4% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Does The Adam J Weissman Foundation accept unsolicited applications?

Its most recent filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and does not take unsolicited requests. Check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

Which funders back the same organizations as The Adam J Weissman Foundation?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Silicon Valley Community Foundation, Tides Foundation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

Where is The Adam J Weissman Foundation based?

The Adam J Weissman Foundation is based in DE.

The Adam J Weissman Foundation

The Adam J Weissman Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Adam J Weissman 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.

$358k

Granted FY2024still arriving

Grants FY2024still arriving

States reached

$50k

Largest

01What it funds

0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

International$1.5MEducation$849kCommunity Improvement$361kHuman Services$221kArts & Culture$191kPhilanthropy$191kEnvironment$86kScience & Tech$74kOther$0

02FY2024 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k10 grants · $32k
$10k–50k8 grants · $176k
$50k–250k3 grants · $150k

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$12M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
PARTNERS ASIA	$50,000
HEIFER PROJECT INTERNATIONAL	$50,000
TESSELLATIONS	$50,000
MCE SOCIAL CAPITAL	$30,000
MIND & LIFE INSTITUTE	$30,000
PENINSULA BRIDGE PROGRAM	$30,000
WOMEN MAKE MOVIES INC	$25,000
BODHI TREE ECODHARMA SANCTUARY	$20,000
SILICON VALLEY SOCIAL VENTURE FUND	$16,000
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH	$15,000
GRASSROOTS ECOLOGY	$10,000
THE ARKANSAS SINGLE PARENT SCHOLARSHIP FUND	$5,000
ARKANSAS FOODBANK	$5,000
LIFEMOVES	$5,000
PLOUGHSHARES FUND INC	$5,000

02The need

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 (FY19–24, $187k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 3% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

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.

Which US states its grants reach

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.

$3.5M · 42 repeat orgs$152k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +35% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

42 repeat relationships: 20 still active in FY2024, 22 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$3.5M

$132k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%

+23%

Still filing today

79%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationInternationalArts & CultureFood & NutritionHuman ServicesEnvironmentOther

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

T
TESSELLATIONS
5× · 2020–2024 · $452k · revenue ×11
HEIFER PROJECT INTERNATIONAL
6× · 2019–2024 · $310k · revenue +35%
PA
Partners Asia
6× · 2019–2024 · $300k · revenue +35%

Funded once

MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
one grant, 2021 · $30k · revenue +20%
IA
INSERM AUVERGNE RHONE ALPES
one grant, 2022 · $18k
SV
SILICON VALLEY SOCIAL VENTURE FUND
one grant, 2023 · $16k

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.

Open Markets Institute

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.

Education

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education

Golden Gate University

Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…

Education

Foreign Policy Research Institute

The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…

International

United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—

World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International

The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit

American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech

Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

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…

Community Improvement

The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International

President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education

Internet Society Foundation

At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…

International

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is World Affairs Council of Northern California; the most unlike its peers is 1TO4. 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

54 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 54 of the 65 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

51/54

Grantees still filing

38/54

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

International$1,444,500Education$698,000Other$700,500Arts & Culture$437,000Human Services$187,000Philanthropy$186,000Environment$66,000

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

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.

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.

Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA22.4× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Impactassetsinc · The San Francisco Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Bright Funds Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · East Bay Community 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 The Adam J Weissman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Adam J Weissman Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

0rely on government for over half their income

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 The Adam J Weissman Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Adam J Weissman 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.

Play a game based on Adam J Weissman’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions

grants reported with no recipient in the public record

The regranting layer

51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer

The DAF merry-go-round

$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds

The endowment market

who holds foundation money, and what just moved

The camps

funders cluster by geography, not ideology

By state

where grant money is based, and what stays home