Skip to content
The Bench Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Bench Family 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.

$1k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0185% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Animals$4kHuman Services$3kArts & Culture$2kPhilanthropy$1kPublic Benefit$1kEducation$518Youth Development$500Housing & Shelter$250Other$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$11k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VOICES OF FLORIDA FUND$1,000
THE LOUIS AND GLORIA FLANZER PHILANTHROPIC TRUST$250
02The need
03

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 (FY18–20, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 72% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT: $300 → 13%NATCHEZ CHILDRENS SERVICES INC: $1k → 31%SECOND CHANCE - LAST OPPORTUNITY INC: $500 → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
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.
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.

44%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7k · 3 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +370% since the first grant, against +46% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
11

Total granted

$7k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+370%
+46%

Still filing today

67%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesAnimalsPhilanthropyHealthInternationalOther
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

  • LS
    LEAD SRQ
    3× · 2019–2023 · $3k
  • HS
    HONOR SANCTUARY INC
    2× · 2017–2020 · $2k · revenue +159%
  • SL
    SATCHELS LAST RESORT
    2× · 2018–2019 · $2k · revenue +370%

Funded once

  • LP
    Lewis P Tabarrini Childrens Music Foundation Incgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue +553%
  • HI
    HAVUHELPED INC
    one grant, 2019 · $1k
  • DO
    Donors of Distinction Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $1k
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.

1
RAGS2RESCUED

No dog should endure pain & suffering of a life of abandonment & neglect

—
2
The Phyllis and Perry Schwartz Foundation
—
3
Ozzie Albies Foundation Inc

Our mission is to end the needless suffering some animals endure. we help pets in need through sheltering, adoption, education, spay/neuter, and community outreach.

Animals
4
Saving Saluda Strays
Animals
5
Lawrence & Lillian Solomon Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
6
The Louise Tumarkin Zazove Foundation Inc
Education
7
Chloesfundlimited

Chloe's Fund is two fold: Providing financial resources and emergency care for Florence Lauderdale Animal Services animals and supporting Shelter Diversion in our community.

Animals
8
The Louise and Claude Rosenberg Jr Family Foundation
—
9
The Donald B and Dorothy L Stabler Foundation
Philanthropy
10
The Fan Fox and Leslie R Samuels Foundation Inc
—
11
Love From Louie Inc

It is the mission of, love from louie, to remove dogs that are suffering physically and emotionally inside the shelter system and provide them with complete medical care and a nurturing home environment to heal and rehabilitate before…

Animals
12
Lazare and Charlotte Kaplan Foundation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wounded Warrior Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Louis and Gloria Flanzer Philanthropic Trust. 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

10 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. 10 of the 16 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LEAD SRQ: $3,000 · OtherLEAD SRQHAVUHELPED INC: $1,250 · OtherHAVUHELPED INCDonors of Distinction Inc: $1,085 · OtherDonors of Distinction IncVOICES OF FLORIDA FUND INC: $1,000 · OtherVOICES OF FLORIDA FUND INCDESIGNING DAUGHTERS OF SARASOTA: $901 · OtherDESIGNING DAUGHTERS OF SARASOTA+2 more: $385 · OtherHONOR SANCTUARY INC: $2,258 · AnimalsHONOR SANCTUARY INCSATCHELS LAST RESORT: $1,550 · AnimalsSATCHELS LAST RESORTNATCHEZ CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $1,000 · Human ServicesNATCHEZ CHILD…SECOND CHANCE - LAST OPPORTUNITY: $500 · Human ServicesSECOND CHANCE…WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $300 · Human ServicesWOUNDED WARRI…Lewis P Tabarrini Childrens Music Foundation Inc: $1,500 · PhilanthropyLewis P Taba…THE LOUIS AND GLORIA FLANZER PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $250 · PhilanthropyTHE LOUIS AN…PENCILS OF PROMISE INCORPORATED: $518 · InternationalST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $100 · Health
Other$7,621Animals$3,808Human Services$1,800Philanthropy$1,750International$518Health$100

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHONOR SANCTUARY INC: $2,258 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNATCHEZ CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPENCILS OF PROMISE INCORPORATED: $518 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSECOND CHANCE - LAST OPPORTUNITY: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LOUIS AND GLORIA FLANZER PHILANTHROPIC TRUST: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

The Community Foundat…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Community Foundation of Sarasota Co IncFL17.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Community Foundation of Sarasota Co Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Bench Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Bench Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 16 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bench Family’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