Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Haberman Foundation

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.

$51k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$11k
Largest
01What you fund
0180% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Religion$46kYouth Development$39kEducation$25kPublic Benefit$20kHealth$15kPhilanthropy$12kAnimals$5kCrime & Legal$4kOther$0
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $22k
$5,004
Median grant
3
States reached
$193k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$11,300
INTL CENTRAL GOSPEL CHURCH PA TEMP$10,800
GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$8,800
IHOPE INC$5,400
SOMA BOOSTERS$5,004
Individual grant recipient$3,996
CONGREGATION BETH SHALOM$3,700
WEST ORANGE ARTS COUNCIL$900
Individual grant recipient$678
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 (FY17–24, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $9k → 16%GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $720 → 16%GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $720 → 16%GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $720 → 16%GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $720 → 16%GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $720 → 16%GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $540 → 16%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.

Which US states your grants reach

AK
NH
WI
MA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CA
VA
KS
DC
TX

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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$205k · 36 repeat orgs$47k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +43% since the first grant, against -7% for the ones you funded once.

36 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 33 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

36
15

Total granted

$205k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
-7%

Still filing today

36%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 13% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationPublic BenefitArts & CulturePhilanthropyCivil RightsOther

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

  • PR
    Pacific Research Institute For Public Policy
    6× · 2017–2022 · $14k · revenue +62%
  • UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
    5× · 2017–2021 · $5k · revenue +44%
  • JUDICIAL WATCH INC
    4× · 2019–2022 · $4k · revenue +40%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $2k
  • UJ
    UNITED JEWISH APPEAL OF METROWEST
    one grant, 2021 · $2k
  • TI
    TOUCH INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue +84%

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
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
2
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.

3
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
4
Institute for Protein Innovation Inc

The institute for protein innovation is advancing protein science to accelerate research and improve human health.

Health
5
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
6
Peter G Peterson Institute for International Economics

The peterson institute for international economics (piie) is an independent nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to strengthening prosperity and human welfare in the global economy through expert analysis and practical…

Social Science
7
Foreign Policy Research Institute

The foreign policy research institute (frpi) is dedicated to producing the highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on crucial foreign policy and national security challenges facing the united states. we educate…

International
8
The Trustees of Princeton University

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…

Education
9
Jewelers of America Inc

Jewelers of america, the most trusted and influential voice of the jewelry industry, empowers and unites its members through expert guidance and advocacy, driving excellence, integrity, and success in an ever-changing marketplace.

10
President and Fellows of Harvard College

Undergraduate, graduate, and professional education and research across a broad array of academic domains.

Education
11
Internet Society Foundation

At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…

International
12
Liberty Justice Center

To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…

Crime & Legal

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Touch 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyCancer Support OrganizationsAnimal Rescue and AdoptionDevelopmental Disabilities …Jewish Community FederationsFaith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Government Accountability R…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 34 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%7%<5yr15%11%5–10yr20%7%10–20yr18%30%20–35yr14%30%35–55yr11%15%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%7%<5yr15%17%5–10yr20%17%10–20yr18%22%20–35yr14%28%35–55yr11%10%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 7% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 4% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
4%1/27
the rest of the field
12%
6,332/52,265

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.

04the grantee network

22 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. 22 of the 59 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
17/22
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Individual grant recipient — $51,618 · OtherIndividual grant recipientACHIEVE FOUNDATION — $26,000 · OtherACHIEVE FOUNDATIONPANUI — $11,700 · OtherPANUIIndividual grant recipient — $11,300 · OtherINTL CENTRAL GOSPEL CHURCH PA TEMP — $10,800 · OtherCONGREGATION B'NAI ISRAEL — $9,900 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $7,758 · OtherCOLUMBIA HIGHSCHOOL — $7,596 · Other+36 more — $79,811 · Other+36 morePacific Research Institute For Public Policy — $13,500 · PhilanthropyJEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA — $6,600 · PhilanthropyGRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $12,940 · Human ServicesI HOPE INC — $5,400 · HealthPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC — $1,350 · HealthFSHD SOCIETY — $1,080 · Health+2 more — $144 · HealthUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH — $5,320 · EducationTOUCH INC — $1,800 · EducationEdChoice Inc — $792 · EducationJUDICIAL WATCH INC — $4,320 · Public BenefitTHE HERITAGE FOUNDATION — $1,580 · Public BenefitCATO INSTITUTE — $280 · Public BenefitJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $5,400 · Religion
Other$216,483Philanthropy$20,100Human Services$12,940Health$7,974Education$7,912Public Benefit$6,180Religion$5,400

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 budgetPacific Research Institute For Public Policy — $13,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $12,940 over 7y, 3.2% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA — $6,600 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetI HOPE INC — $5,400 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $5,400 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH — $5,320 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN PAWS INC — $4,500 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC — $4,320 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE — $3,240 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTHE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE — $3,240 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTOUCH INC — $1,800 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum — $1,620 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HERITAGE FOUNDATION — $1,580 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPRINCETON CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE — $1,530 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC — $1,350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFSHD SOCIETY — $1,080 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetEdChoice Inc — $792 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetYoung America's Foundation — $540 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSIMON WIESENTHAL CENTER INC — $540 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCATO INSTITUTE — $280 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetARTHRITIS FOUNDATION INC — $90 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPARALYZED VETERANS OF AMERICA — $54 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 Pacific Research Institute For Public Policy
  • Who funds GRASSROOTS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY FEDERATION OF SAN FRANCISCO THE PENINSULA MARIN & SONOMA
  • Who funds I HOPE INC
  • Who funds JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
  • Who funds SOUTHERN PAWS INC
  • Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE
  • Who funds THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE
  • Who funds TOUCH INC
  • Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
  • Who funds THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION
  • Who funds PRINCETON CHILD DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE
  • Who funds PANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK 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.

Paypal Charitable Giving FundDC7.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving 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 Haberman 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 60%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    6get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 59 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph