Skip to content
The Grinberg Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Grinberg 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.

$242k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$502kPhilanthropy$402kHealth$389kCivil Rights$180kInternational$104kEducation$80kSocial Science$67kHousing & Shelter$65kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $132k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UJA-FEDERATION OF NEW YORK$100,000
PARK AVENUE SYNAGOGUE$42,205
AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE$25,000
BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION CENTER$25,000
LYMPHOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION$25,000
NEXT FOR AUTISM$15,000
THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF MANHATTAN$5,000
HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY FOUNDATION$5,000
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 (FY17–21, $65k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%win NYC: $25k → 17%WIN NYC: $15k → 17%WIN NYC: $15k → 17%WIN NYC: $10k → 17%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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 15 repeat orgs$173k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +42% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
15

Total granted

$1.7M
$168k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
+24%

Still filing today

73%
53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
HealthArts & CultureHuman ServicesEducationInternationalPhilanthropyOther
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

  • UJ
    UNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC
    2× · 2023–2025 · $400k · revenue +34%
  • AMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE
    6× · 2018–2025 · $180k · revenue +70%
  • MM
    MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER
    6× · 2017–2024 · $120k · revenue +59%

Funded once

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF ISRAEL GOSPEL MINISTRY INC
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • EC
    ETHICAL CULTURE FIELDSTON SCHOOL
    one grant, 2019 · $40k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $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
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
2
National Council of Jewish Women Incorporated

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.

Community Improvement
3
New York Genome Center Inc

Operate a state-of-the-art, world-class genomic research center that creates and uses advanced genomics to understand the genetic basis of disease. for more information, see schedule o.

Health
4
Neurology Associates of Stony Brook University Faculty Practice Corp

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
5
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
6
Stony Brook Urology University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
7
Foundation for Jewish Philanthropies Inc

See schedule othe organization is a not-for-profit, public charity established in 1911 to provide for the quality and continuity of jewish life in western new york and around the world through private philanthropy. the foundation seeks,…

Philanthropy
8
Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Committed to exceptional healthcare quality for all and actively engaged with our community, einstein drives scientific discovery and educates compassionate leaders in health and science.

Education
9
Stony Brook Internists University Faculty Practice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
10
Network of Jewish Human Service Agencies Inc

The network is an international membership association of more than 170 non profit human service agencies in the united states, canada and israel. its members provide a full range of human services for the jewish community and beyond,…

Human Services
11
University Associates in Obstetrics and Gynecology University Faculty Pract ice Corporation

Provide clinical instruction to and supervision of medical school students, interns and residents and, incident thereto, rendering professional services.

Health
12
United States Naval Institute

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.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Museum of Manhattan; the most unlike its peers is Childfund International Usa. 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

20 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. 20 of the 31 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PARK AVENUE SYNAGOGUE INC: $502,458 · OtherPARK AVENUE SYNAGOGUE INCFRIENDS OF ISRAEL GOSPEL MINISTRY INC: $100,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF ISRAEL GOSPEL MINISTRY INCBREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION CENTER: $85,000 · OtherBREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION CENTERTHE MILKEN INSTITUTE: $66,666 · OtherTHE MILKEN INSTITUTEETHICAL CULTURE FIELDSTON SCHOOL: $40,000 · Other+12 more: $64,660 · Other+12 moreUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $400,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FED…MONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER: $119,500 · HealthMONTEFIORE MEDICA…LYMPHOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $105,000 · HealthLYMPHOMA RESEARCH…NEXT FOR AUTISM INC: $30,000 · HealthNEXT FOR AUTISM I…GLOBAL LYME ALLIANCE INC: $14,000 · Health+3 more: $6,500 · HealthAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $180,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN JE…WOMEN IN NEED INC: $65,000 · Human ServicesETHICAL CULTURE FIELDSTON SCHOOL: $40,000 · EducationTHE JEWISH MUSEUM: $8,500 · Arts & CultureCHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF MANHATTAN: $5,000 · Arts & CultureNATIONAL SYMPHONY ORCH ASSN OF WASHINGTON DC: $1,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$858,784Philanthropy$400,000Health$275,000Civil Rights$180,000Human Services$65,000Education$40,000Arts & Culture$14,500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNITED JEWISH APPEAL-FEDERATION OF JEWISH PHILANTHROPIES OF NEW YORK INC: $400,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH COMMITTEE: $180,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetMONTEFIORE MEDICAL CENTER: $119,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetLYMPHOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $105,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetTHE MILKEN INSTITUTE: $66,666 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWOMEN IN NEED INC: $65,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetETHICAL CULTURE FIELDSTON SCHOOL: $40,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBAL LYME ALLIANCE INC: $14,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE JEWISH MUSEUM: $8,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF MANHATTAN: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBLADDER CANCER ADVOCACY NETWORK INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSAMUEL WAXMAN CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $4,200 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetLAWYERS FOR CHILDREN INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetELLUMINATE INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetISRAEL CANCER RESEARCH FUND INC: $1,800 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVISITING NURSE SERVICE OF NEW YORK: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFORCE-FACING OUR RISK OF CANCER EMPOWERED INC: $500 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.

National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Grinberg Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Grinberg Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Force-Facing Our Risk of Cancer Empowered Inc: 15% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 Grinberg Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Grinberg 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.

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 31 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 Grinberg Family’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