· Private foundation
The Farbman Family 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 $10k4 grants · $22k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $269k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMALGAMATED CHARITABLE FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL | $50,000 |
| COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY | $40,000 |
| VIOLENCE INTERVENTION | $40,000 |
| NORTH STAR FUND | $40,000 |
| INTERRELIGIOUS FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY | $25,000 |
| COMMUNITY PARTNERS | $25,000 |
| WOMEN AND JUSTICE PROJECT | $25,000 |
| CALLACTIVIT | $19,445 |
| YOUTH REPRESENT | $10,000 |
| WOMEN'S COMMUNITY JUSTICE ASSOCIATION | $10,000 |
| GIRLS FOR GENDER EQUITY | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIVE PHILANTHROPY | $7,000 |
| THE BILLY MAC FUND | $5,000 |
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, $465k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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.
23 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 6 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, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $106k 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
- THTHE HIVE COMMUNITY CIRCLE5× · 2020–2025 · $293k · revenue +387% · 55% of their budget
- GIGRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC2× · 2021–2023 · $150k · revenue +5%
- CPCOMMUNITY PARTNERS3× · 2021–2025 · $75k · revenue +73%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $220k
Center for Third World Organizinggraduatedone grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue +34%- SCSOUTHERN CONSERVATION PARTNERS INCone grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -63%
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.
Our mission as a global alliance is to provide strategies, research, and resources that support the critical agency and influence of women's foundations and gender justice funders in the movement for equality, justice, and power for all.
Women first invests in grassroots initiatives driven by women and girls in developing economies that sustainably advance their lives.
Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…
New york restoration project ("nyrp") believes that nature is a fundamental right of every new yorker. nyrp works collaboratively with residents in communities across the five boroughs to renovate gardens, restore parks, plant trees,…
The national council of jewish women is a grassroots nonpartisan organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children and families.
The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s. approach to foreign policy. through…
Common future is a network of pioneering leaders across the u.s. and canada who work deeply within their communities to create alternative approaches to business, philanthropy, and investing. we envision an economy that has transitioned…
Ccr is a non-profit legal and educational organization dedicated to advancing and protecting the rights guaranteed by the united states constitution the universal declaration of human rights. ccr stands with social justice movements…
Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.
Ultraviolet education fund (uvef) is a 501c3 organization. ultraviolet is the premier national organization advocating for gender justice issues using creative, strategic campaigning and digital-first organizing. ultraviolet drives…
Southern coalition for social justice partners with communities of color and economically disadvantaged communities across the south to defend and advance their political, social, and economic rights. through an intersectional and…
Common impact's mission is to strengthen the capacity of social change organizations, enabling them to better run and scale their programs. through its partnership with companies, common impact taps into the business skills and expertise…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy and the most unlike its peers is Re-Entry Rocks 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 31 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
54 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. 54 of the 83 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 THE HIVE COMMUNITY CIRCLE ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL FUND FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds Center for Third World Organizing ↗
- Who funds GRASSROOTS INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
- Who funds Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds YOUTH REPRESENT INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH STAR FUND INC ↗
- Who funds NEW HOPE COMMUNITY INC ↗
- Who funds My Sisters Place Inc ↗
- Who funds A LONG WALK HOME INC ↗
- Who funds The Billy Mac Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN CONSERVATION PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds REGENERATIVE SPORTSCARE FOUNDATIONINC ↗
- Who funds WOMEN MAKE MOVIES INC ↗
- Who funds ACORN Center For Restoration & Freedom ↗
- Who funds JACOB BURNS FILM CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds RIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Violence Intervention Program ↗
- Who funds RAMAPO FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds THE HEAL PROJECT ↗
- Who funds NORTHWELL HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Solidaire Network Inc ↗
- Who funds DAUGHTERS BEYOND INCARCERATION ↗
- Who funds BARNARD COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds BLACK BELT JUSTICE CENTER ↗
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: Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Impactassetsinc · Novo Foundation · Borealis Philanthropy · New York Women's Foundation Inc · Ms Foundation for Women Inc · Solidaire Network Inc · Common Counsel Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · The Ford 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 Farbman Family 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.
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 The Farbman Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Farbman Family 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.