· Private foundation
The Drell-Nack Philanthropic 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Partners for Pediatric Vision | $3,000 |
| Honest Reporting | $2,500 |
| Global Giving | $2,000 |
| Ukraine Defense Support | $2,000 |
| GPF Foundation | $1,500 |
| PETA | $1,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,052 |
| Louis D Brandeis Center | $1,000 |
| Animal Legal Defense Fund | $1,000 |
| National Park Foundation | $1,000 |
| IsraAID (US) Humanitarian Assistance Inc | $1,000 |
| Conservation NW | $1,000 |
| Paws of War Inc | $1,000 |
| Beth Jacob Congregation | $1,000 |
| Food for Climate League | $1,000 |
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 (FY22–24, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 73% 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 +25% since the first grant, against -5% for the ones you funded once.
18 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 18 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k 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
- HIHONESTREPORTINGCOM INC3× · 2022–2024 · $8k · revenue +50%
- ALANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC3× · 2022–2024 · $4k · revenue +31%
- CFCOMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING IN AMERICA INC2× · 2022–2023 · $4k · revenue +56%
Funded once
- WJWORLD JEWISH CONGRESSone grant, 2023 · $1k
MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INCone grant, 2022 · $1k · revenue +13%- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $1k
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.
Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
To improve the lives of people through innovative scientific and engineering research.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
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.
To bring animals out of crisis and strengthen the bond between people and animals through emergency sheltering, disaster relief services, financial assistance and education. redrover accomplishes its mission by engaging volunteers and…
The Academy's mission is to enhance member career fulfillment and promote brain health for all.
The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Medecins Sans Frontieres Usa Inc and the most unlike its peers is Internet Archive. 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 24 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 9% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
40 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. 40 of the 65 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
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 GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds HONESTREPORTINGCOM INC ↗
- Who funds GPF FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds COMMITTEE FOR ACCURACY IN MIDDLE EAST REPORTING IN AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds Mercy Ships International ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION NW ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS FOR PEDIATRIC VISION ↗
- Who funds DIRECT ACTION EVERYWHERE ↗
- Who funds UKRAINE DEFENSE SUPPORT ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds HEARTLAND ANIMAL SHELTER NFP ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF MAGEN DAVID ADOM ↗
- Who funds PAWS OF WAR INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD FOR CLIMATE LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds The Louis D Brandeis Center Inc ↗
- Who funds APOPO US INC ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds PAWS CHICAGO ↗
- Who funds PREDATOR DEFENSE ↗
- Who funds Physicians Committee for Responsible Med ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds ONE TAIL AT A TIME NFP ↗
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: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Jewish Communal Fund · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Drell-Nack Philanthropic 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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.