Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Donald and Louise Epstein Foundation Inc

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.

$6k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What you fund
0188% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Education$21kReligion$11kInternational$5kHealth$3kFood & Nutrition$2kArts & Culture$2kRecreation & Sports$800Civil Rights$500Other$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$103k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KENYON COLLEGE$3,500
FOOD FOR THE HUNGRY$1,000
MTV ARTS$1,000
BNAI ISRAEL$500
Individual grant recipient$250
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–17, $500) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%ARC OF BALTIMORE: $500 → 19%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$43k · 10 repeat orgs$5k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +23% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.

10 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
9

Total granted

$43k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+10%

Still filing today

30%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesEnvironmentFood & NutritionArts & CultureOther

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

  • KENYON COLLEGE
    8× · 2017–2025 · $18k · revenue +23%
  • FF
    FOOD FOR THE HUNGRY INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $2k · revenue +6%
  • TD
    The Downtown Sailing Center Inc
    2× · 2017–2023 · $800 · revenue +120%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • TC
    THE CHRYSANTHEMUM FUND
    one grant, 2024 · $500
  • ER
    EPISCOPAL RELEIF AND DEVELOPMENT
    one grant, 2017 · $500

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Montgomery County Green Bank Corporation

Montgomery county green bank corporation is making energy efficiency and clean energy attainable for all in our community and creating a more sustainable and resilient future.

Environment
2
Jobsohio

To promote economic development, job creation, job retention, job training, workforce development, and the retention of current and recruitment of new business to ohio.

Employment
3
The Arc of the District of Columbia Inc

To improve the quality of life for all persons with intellectual disabilities and their families through supports and advocacy.

Human Services
4
The Democracy Collaborative Foundation Inc

See schedule othe democracy collaborative was established in 2000 to advance understanding of democracy for the 21st century and to promote emerging strategies and innovations in community development that enhance democratic life. in…

Education
5
Montgomery County Food Council Inc

Mcfc builds an equitable, resilient and sustainable local food system through collaboration, transformation, and cultivation.mcfc envisions a vibrant and equitable food system that is healthy for our community, economy, and environment.

Food & Nutrition
6
Montgomery County Community Foundation

The mission of the Montgomery County Community Foundation (MCCF) is to provide leadership in Montgomery County by directing sustainable financial resources that strengthen our community and improve the quality of life for current and…

Philanthropy
7
Allosource

Inspired by the gift of donation from our communities, allosource responsibly provides innovative cellular and tissue allografts to advance patient healing.

Health
8
Foundation for Financial Planning Inc

Our mission is to help people in need improve their financial lives by expanding access to pro bono financial planning.

Human Services
9
Metropolitan Jewish Health System Inc

Mjhs health system is a charitable not-for-profit established to support the activities of affiliated organizations. mjhs is built on the core values of compassion, dignity and respect, first established by the four brooklyn ladies in…

Health
10
Troy Community Land Bank Corporation

The troy community land bank acquires, rehabilitates and resells vacant and abandoned buildings throughout the city of troy, new york

Community Improvement
11
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

12
Us Digital Response

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…

Public Safety & Disaster

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Arc Baltimore Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Downtown Sailing Center Inc. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 21 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

HARCOURT PARISH EPISCOPAL CHURCH — $6,500 · OtherHARCOURT PARISH EPISCOPAL CHURCHBNAI ISRAEL — $5,000 · OtherBNAI ISRAELLIFEGATE — $3,500 · OtherLIFEGATEARROW CENTER FOR ED TANGRAM — $2,500 · OtherARROW CENTER FOR ED TANGRAMTANGRAM SCHOOL — $2,500 · OtherTANGRAM SCHOOLTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY — $1,400 · OtherTHE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITYIndividual grant recipient — $1,000 · Other+7 more — $2,850 · Other+7 moreKENYON COLLEGE — $18,000 · EducationKENYON COLLEGEFOOD FOR THE HUNGRY INC — $2,200 · Food & NutritionMTVARTS INC — $1,000 · Arts & CultureThe Downtown Sailing Center Inc — $800 · Recreation & SportsTHE ARC BALTIMORE INC — $500 · Human ServicesGROUNDSWELL INC — $400 · EnvironmentThe Shalem Foundation — $200 · Crime & Legal
Other$25,250Education$18,000Food & Nutrition$2,200Arts & Culture$1,000Recreation & Sports$800Human Services$500Environment$400Crime & Legal$200

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetKENYON COLLEGE — $18,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD FOR THE HUNGRY INC — $2,200 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMTVARTS INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetThe Downtown Sailing Center Inc — $800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ARC BALTIMORE INC — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROUNDSWELL INC — $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMid-Ohio Foodbank — $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Shalem Foundation — $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 KENYON COLLEGE
  • Who funds FOOD FOR THE HUNGRY INC
  • Who funds MTVARTS INC
  • Who funds The Downtown Sailing Center Inc
  • Who funds THE ARC BALTIMORE INC
  • Who funds GROUNDSWELL INC
  • Who funds Mid-Ohio Foodbank
  • Who funds The Shalem 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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA5.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 The Donald and Louise Epstein 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 1%
  • The Arc Baltimore Inc1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get 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
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 21 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph