Skip to content
The Jan M and Eugenia Krol Charitable Foundation Inc C/O R Rosenthal at a glance

· Private foundation

The Jan M and Eugenia Krol Charitable Foundation Inc C/O R Rosenthal

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$90k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$28k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$368kEducation$255kInternational$97kArts & Culture$43kHuman Services$26kPhilanthropy$20kPublic Safety & Disaster$8kCrime & Legal$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $17k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $73k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY$27,500
UMASS CHAN MEDICAL SCHOOL FOUNDATION INC$20,000
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE INC$15,000
RETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC$10,000
THE UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM$9,650
SAVE A CHILD'S HEART FOUNDATION US INC$5,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC$2,754
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.

US giving: 68% of grant dollars ($559k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 32% that went abroad ($267k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–22, $67k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 6% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%JEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES: $7k → 8%JEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES: $6k → 8%JEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES: $3k → 8%JEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES: $2k → 8%JEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES: $2k → 8%JEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES: $2k → 8%POTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $8k → 8%POTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $8k → 8%POTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $8k → 8%POTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $8k → 8%POTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $5k → 8%POTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $4k → 8%MONDAY NIGHT HOSPITALITY: $4k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MN
NY
MA
PA
NJ
CT
CA
MD
DC

Beyond the US: 32% of all-years giving ($267k)

2 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Poland$245k · 9 grants
Israel$22k · 6 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$750k · 17 repeat orgs$65k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
10

Total granted

$750k
$35k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+11%

Still filing today

71%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
InternationalHealthHuman ServicesSocial ScienceEducationPhilanthropyOther
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

  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $80k · revenue +162%
  • PC
    POTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $41k · revenue +46%
  • NA
    NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION
    6× · 2017–2022 · $34k · revenue +60%

Funded once

  • UH
    US HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
    one grant, 2024 · $6k
  • OI
    OUTREACH INFORMATION SERVICE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $4k · revenue -76%
  • CF
    CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $4k
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
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
2
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
3
Global Down Syndrome Foundation

To significantly improve the lives of people with down syndrome through research, medical care, education and advocacy. an important part of this mission is to support the global affiliate organizations that we helped establish and…

Health
4
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
5
Target Als Foundation Inc

Our mission is to break down barriers to als research to find effective treatments. by uniting academia, the pharma and biotech industry, government, venture capital, related nonprofits, and the als community, we aim to overcome the…

Education
6
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc

Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…

Health
7
Critical Path Institute

The critical path institute is a catalyst in the development of new approaches that advance medical innovation and regulatory science. this is achieved by leading teams that share data, knowledge and expertise resulting in sound, consensus…

Health
8
Hugo W Moser Research Institute At Kennedy Krieger Inc

The hugo w. moser research institute at kennedy krieger, inc. (the "research institute") is an internationally recognized research facility finding answers to problems and injuries that affect a child's developing brain. researchers have…

Science & Tech
9
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
10
Lung Cancer Research Foundation

The mission of the lung cancer research foundation is to improve lung cancer outcomes by funding research for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment and cure of lung cancer.

Health
11
Blood Cancer United Inc

Our mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, hodgkin's disease and myeloma, and improve the quality of life of patients and their families.

Health
12
Jaeb Center for Health Research Foundation Inc

Our mission is to expand scientific knowledge and improve public health by designing and conducting world-class clinical trials and epidemiologic research.

Unclassified
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Deborah Hospital Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Children's Cerebral Palsy Movement Inc. 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

22 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. 22 of the 30 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
13/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY: $245,000 · OtherWARSAW UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGYUMASS MEDICAL SCHOOL: $50,000 · OtherUMASS MEDICAL SCHOOLDR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $37,500 · OtherDR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATIONNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION: $34,000 · OtherNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSIONSAVE A CHILD'S HEART FOUNDATION US INC: $33,000 · OtherSAVE A CHILD'S HEART FOUNDATION US INCUS HOLOCUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM: $27,000 · OtherUS HOLOCUST MEMORIAL MUSEUMHEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM: $21,500 · Other+7 more: $35,860 · Other+7 moreDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $79,500 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer Institu…RETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC: $57,000 · HealthRETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRU…DEBORAH HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $52,000 · HealthDEBORAH HOSPITAL FOUNDATIO…+1 more: $3,000 · HealthPOTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $41,000 · Human ServicesPOTOMAC C…JEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES INC: $22,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FO…OUTREACH INFORMATION SERVICE INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesOUTREACH …AMERICAN FEDERATION FOR AGING RESEARCH INC: $27,500 · Social ScienceUMASS CHAN MEDICAL SCHOOL FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · PhilanthropyWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $7,754 · InternationalDIRECT RELIEF: $3,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INC: $3,000 · InternationalUnited States Association for UNHCR: $3,000 · InternationalREFUGEES INTERNATIONAL INC: $3,000 · InternationalTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $10,000 · EducationIvymount Foundation Inc: $5,500 · Education
Other$483,860Health$191,500Human Services$67,000Social Science$27,500Philanthropy$20,000International$19,754Education$15,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $79,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetRETT SYNDROME RESEARCH TRUST INC: $57,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetDEBORAH HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $52,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetPOTOMAC COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $41,000 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetDR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $37,500 over 7y, 0.7% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION: $34,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetSAVE A CHILD'S HEART FOUNDATION US INC: $33,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN FEDERATION FOR AGING RESEARCH INC: $27,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetJEWISH FOUNDATION FOR GROUP HOMES INC: $22,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $9,650 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $7,754 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetIvymount Foundation Inc: $5,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetOUTREACH INFORMATION SERVICE INC: $4,000 over 1y, 9.5% of budgetALEXS LEMONADE STAND FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUnited States Association for UNHCR: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChildren's Cerebral Palsy Movement Inc: $3,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetREFUGEES INTERNATIONAL INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Network for GoodDC8.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Jan M and Eugenia Krol Charitable Foundation Inc C/O R Rosenthal funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Jan M and Eugenia Krol Charitable Foundation Inc C/O R Rosenthal. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 Jan M and Eugenia Krol Charitable Foundation Inc C/O R Rosenthal?

Find your warmest path to The Jan M and Eugenia Krol Charitable Foundation Inc C/O R Rosenthal 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 30 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 Jan M and Eugenia Krol Charitable Foundation Inc C/O R Rosenthal’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