Skip to content
The Bernard W and Bernadette Loeb Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Bernard W and Bernadette Loeb Charitable 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.

$22k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Housing & Shelter$45kFood & Nutrition$42kReligion$41kHuman Services$15kAnimals$13kPublic Safety & Disaster$10kHealth$8kYouth Development$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$1,250
Median grant
3
States reached
$458k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Homeless Empowerment Program$10,000
Humane Borders$4,000
Coventry Food Pantry$3,000
French Pickering Creek Conservation$1,250
Brandywine Valley SPCA$1,000
The Path Mission$1,000
Williston Animal Group$1,000
The Key Training Center$500
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 (FY17–25, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 16% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Humane Borders: $4k → 15%GARDEN OF HEALTH: $5k → 7%COMFORT CASES: $5k → 8%Garden of Health: $3k → 7%CHESTER COUNTY FUND FOR WOMEN & CHI: $5k → 6%THE FUND FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS: $3k → 6%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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$142k · 13 repeat orgs$50k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +92% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
14

Total granted

$142k
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+92%
+13%

Still filing today

69%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterEnvironmentHealthInternationalOther
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
    LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR
    4× · 2017–2021 · $40k · revenue +73% · 40% of their budget
  • ROLLING HARVEST FOOD RESCUE
    6× · 2017–2023 · $31k · revenue +166%
  • HE
    HOMELESS EMERGENCY PROJECT INC
    4× · 2022–2025 · $29k · revenue +55%

Funded once

  • PC
    PLAIN COMPASSION CRISIS RESPONSE
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue 0%
  • CC
    COMFORT CASES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +186%
  • W
    WCBA
    one grant, 2019 · $5k
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
Caloosa Humane Society Inc

The mission of Caloosa Humane Society is to serve, shelter, and protect the homeless pets in our care. We are dedicated to finding permanent and loving adoptive homes for our companion animals in need. Our no-kill facility provides low…

Education
2
Liberty Humane Society Inc

We aim to improve animal welfare and reduce pet homelessness by providing affordable spay neuter services and wellness care enabling a better future for pets their families and all people who love them.

Animals
3
Humane Society of Walton County Inc

The mission of the Humane Society of Walton County is to provide asanctuary for underprivileged animals, to place animals intopermanent, loving homes and to support pet owners by offeringresources, education and spay/neuter services.

Animals
4
House of Hope Animal Rescue Inc

To rescue, maintain, and place domestic animals abandoned in kill-shelters or discarded by volume breeders and to raise funds in order to accomplish our mission.

Animals
5
St Augustine Humane Society Inc

Promoting healthy responsible lifelong pet ownership by serving the medical and rehabilitative needs of animals while encouraging the humane treatment of animals, preventing overpopulation, and ending animal cruelty.

Animals
6
Humane Society of Harris County

Humane Society of Harris County's mission remains steadfast: to provide high-quality adoption, transport, foster, Trap, neuter, release, and pet food pantry services to our community. Yet, with a fresh perspective and a renewed passion,…

—
7
Hopkins County Humane Society

The mission of the hopkins county humane society is to ensure the humane and compassionate treatment of all animals.

Animals
8
Florida Pointer Rescue Inc

Rescue pointer dogs and treat back to health and f

Animals
9
Fluvanna County Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

To rescue domestic animals from cruelty, neglect, and abandonment and place

Animals
10
Kind Keeper Inc

Our mission is to save the lives of homeless pets, promote kindness to animals, and advance the highest standards in animal welfare. Our goal is to create an environment in which all rescued animals are given or found a permanent loving…

Animals
11
Humane Society of Vero Beach and Indian River County Inc

None

Animals
12
Ruff Haven

The three-fold mission of Ruff Haven Crisis Sheltering is to provide a temporary safe haven for companion animals to keep pets and their people together in times of crisis; increase pet retention, and decrease the number of animals…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Homeless Emergency Project Inc; the most unlike its peers is Little Sisters of the Poor. 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

22 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 22 of the 32 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
17/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR: $40,000 · OtherLITTLE SISTERS OF THE POORROLLING HARVEST FOOD RESCUE: $30,500 · OtherROLLING HARVEST FOOD RESCUELittle Sisters of the Poor Holy Fam: $10,295 · OtherLittle Sisters of the Poor Holy FamWCBA: $5,000 · OtherThe Fund for Women Girls: $5,000 · Other+11 more: $14,550 · Other+11 moreHOMELESS EMERGENCY PROJECT INC: $29,000 · Housing & ShelterHOMELESS EMERGENCY…Community Coalition on Homelessness dba Turning Points: $3,000 · Housing & ShelterCommunity Coalitio…Garden of Health Inc: $8,000 · Human ServicesGarden of Heal…THE FUND FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS: $7,500 · Human ServicesTHE FUND FOR W…COMFORT CASES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesCOMFORT CASES …HUMANE BORDERS INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesHUMANE BORDERS…GULF COAST HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $3,500 · AnimalsTHE SANCTUARY AT HAAFSVILLE INC: $2,500 · AnimalsSNIP Collier Inc: $2,500 · AnimalsHART FOR ANIMALS INC: $1,200 · AnimalsWILLISTON ANIMAL GROUP INC: $1,000 · AnimalsBRANDYWINE VALLEY SPCA: $1,000 · AnimalsPLAIN COMPASSION CRISIS RESPONSE: $10,000 · InternationalTHE DIGDEEP RIGHT TO WATER PROJECT: $4,500 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE EVERGLADES INC: $550 · EnvironmentCOVENTRY FOOD PANTRY: $3,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$105,345Housing & Shelter$32,000Human Services$24,500Animals$11,700International$10,000Environment$5,050Food & Nutrition$3,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLITTLE SISTERS OF THE POOR: $40,000 over 4y, 40% of budgetROLLING HARVEST FOOD RESCUE: $30,500 over 6y, 2.1% of budgetHOMELESS EMERGENCY PROJECT INC: $29,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetPLAIN COMPASSION CRISIS RESPONSE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetGarden of Health Inc: $8,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTHE FUND FOR WOMEN AND GIRLS: $7,500 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCOMFORT CASES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE DIGDEEP RIGHT TO WATER PROJECT: $4,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGULF COAST HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $3,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOVENTRY FOOD PANTRY: $3,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetTHE SANCTUARY AT HAAFSVILLE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSNIP Collier Inc: $2,500 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetTHE BARN AT SPRING BROOK FARM INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetWORK TO RIDE INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHART FOR ANIMALS INC: $1,200 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWILLISTON ANIMAL GROUP INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EVERGLADES INC: $550 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PATH OF CITRUS COUNTY INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $250 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.

Network for GoodPhillies Charities IncThe Philadelphia Foun…The Pfizer Foundation…Duke Energy FoundationVanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…Charities Aid Foundat…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Natl Christian Charit…
Network for GoodDC14.1× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · Phillies Charities Inc · The Philadelphia Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Duke Energy Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc

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 Bernard W and Bernadette Loeb Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Bernard W and Bernadette Loeb Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Homeless Emergency Project Inc: 15% of income from government
  • Comfort Cases Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 Bernard W and Bernadette Loeb Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Bernard W and Bernadette Loeb Charitable 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.

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 32 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bernard W and Bernadette Loeb’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