· Private foundation
Doris & Stanley Tananbaum 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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k25 grants · $123k
- $10k–50k33 grants · $719k
- $50k–250k12 grants · $1.3M
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UJA FEDERATION OF NEW YORK | $250,000 |
| ALZHEIMER'S DRUG DISCOVERY FOUNDATION | $165,000 |
| AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE COVENT GARDEN ROYAL BALLET | $150,000 |
| DREYFOOS SCHOOL OF THE ARTS FOUNDATION | $130,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA | $128,000 |
| ISRAEL ON CAMPUS COALITION | $105,000 |
| JEWISH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY | $100,000 |
| KRAVIS CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS | $100,000 |
| PARK AVENUE SYNAGOGUE | $95,000 |
| LEGAL AID SOCIETY | $85,000 |
| HOMES FOR LIFE FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| HEBREW FREE LOAN SOCIETY | $75,000 |
| THE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC | $50,000 |
| ALZHEIMER'S FOUNDATION OF AMERICA | $45,000 |
| FACING HISTORY AND OURSELVES INC | $40,000 |
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, $1.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 99% 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.
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 +39% since the first grant, against +27% for the ones you funded once.
98 repeat relationships — 43 still active in FY2025, 55 since wound down; 24 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, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $232k 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
- UJUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.5M · revenue +39%
- TITHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC9× · 2017–2025 · $925k · revenue +135%
- IOISRAEL ON CAMPUS COALITION INC9× · 2017–2025 · $580k · revenue +522%
Funded once
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL BALLET SCHOOL INCone grant, 2018 · $100k · revenue -59% · 59% of their budget
- FAFANATICS ALL IN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $100k · revenue -98%
NORTON MUSEUM OF ART INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue +30%
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.
The institute for advanced study (the institute) is one of the world's leading centers for theoretical research and intellectual inquiry. see schedule o.
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.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Support the hebrew univ. of jerusalem, israel's foremost center of higher edu. & research.
The american technion society supports the technion's critical research and (continued on sch o)
Research, education and general - princeton university is a private not-for-profit, non-sectarian institution of higher learning with approximately 5,700 undergraduate and 3,300 graduate students. 2,500 students graduated in the 2024-2025…
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.
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
The mission of the institute is to translate basic genetic and molecular mechanisms of schizophrenia and related developmental brain disorders into clinical advances that change the lives of affected individuals. it is catalyzing a new…
Biu produces students who excel in the sciences, humanities, law, engineering, business & the arts.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
The weizmann institute of science, located in rehovot, israel, is one of the worlds top-ranking, multidisciplinary research institutions. at any one time, several thousand scientists, staff and students are involved in hundreds of research…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tiger Woods Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Friends of the Royal Ballet School Inc. 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 33 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
136 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. 136 of the 206 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC ↗
- Who funds THE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL ON CAMPUS COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds School of the Arts Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds BALLET THEATRE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE ALEXANDER HAMILTON SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds HEBREW FREE LOAN SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds FACING HISTORY & OURSELVES INC ↗
- Who funds RAYMOND F KRAVIS CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS INC ↗
- Who funds HOMES FOR LIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds METROPOLITAN MUSEUM OF ART ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DRUG DISCOVERY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds HARVARD-WESTLAKE SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds THE DISCOVERY LAND COMPANY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE LEGAL AID SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Dartmouth College ↗
- Who funds WORLD JEWISH CONGRESS (AMERICAN SECTION) INC ↗
- Who funds LET GROW INC ↗
- Who funds ISRAAID US GLOBAL HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE INC ↗
- Who funds BRENTWOOD SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL BALLET SCHOOL INC ↗
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: The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Annenberg Foundation · Combined Jewish Philanthropies of Greater Boston Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Alan B Slifka Foundation · The Margaret and Daniel Loeb Foundation · The Hearthland Foundation · United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies of New York Inc · California Community Foundation · The Ahmanson 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 Doris & Stanley Tananbaum 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.
- Als Therapy Development Foundation Inc — 8% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Connecticut Public Broadcasting Inc — 3% of income from government
- Trustees of Boston College — 3% of income from government
- The Filmmakers Collaborative Inc — 1% of income from government
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 Doris & Stanley Tananbaum Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Doris & Stanley Tananbaum 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.