Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

The Laura Rosenberg Foundation Inc

Pediatric leukemia research and support

$659k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$245k
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Health$1.9MRecreation & Sports$1.7MHuman Services$298kArts & Culture$23kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $607k
$56,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SUNRISE DAY CAMP ASSOC INC$245,000
MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING$150,000
HAPPINESS IS CAMPING$100,000
MISSION DISRUPT STAND UP TO CANCER$56,500
THE MORGAN CENTER$55,000
SIBS PLACE$30,000
HOSPICE CARE NETWORK$15,000
SAORI ARTS NYC$7,500
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 (FY18–25, $827k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SIBS PLACE: $75k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $80k → 7%SIBS PLACE: $75k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $60k → 7%SIBS PLACE: $75k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $55k → 7%SIBS PLACE: $75k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $35k → 7%SIBS PLACE: $35k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $30k → 7%SIBS PLACE: $35k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $30k → 7%SIBS PLACE: $30k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $30k → 7%SIBS PLACE: $25k → 6%THE MORGAN CENTER: $30k → 7%HOSPICE CARE NETWORK: $15k → 6%HOSPICE CARE NETWORK: $15k → 6%HOSPICE CARE NETWORK: $12k → 6%HOSPICE CARE NETWORK: $10k → 6%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.

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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$3.7M · 8 repeat orgs$387k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +86% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$3.7M
$331k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+86%
+19%

Still filing today

75%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $57k 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
Human ServicesHealthReligionPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther

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

  • MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +121%
  • SP
    SIBS PLACE INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $425k · revenue +20%
  • TM
    THE MORGAN CENTER
    8× · 2018–2025 · $350k · revenue +36% · 27% of their budget

Funded once

  • BF
    BARRY & FLORENCE FRIEDBERG JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC
    one grant, 2017 · $293k · revenue +19%
  • BC
    BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -28%
  • H
    HOSPICE
    one grant, 2021 · $8k

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
Imagine a Cure Cancer Treatment
Health
2
Targeting Resistance in Cancer Cooperative
Health
3
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
4
We Beat Cancer
Philanthropy
5
Long Island Jewish Medical Center

Long island jewish medical center is part of the northwell health ("northwell"), which strives to improve the health of the communities it serves and is committed to providing the highest quality clinical care; educating the current and…

Health
6
Northwell Health Cancer Institute Inc

Northwell health cancer institute is part of northwell health, inc. ("northwell"), which strives to improve the health of the communities it serves and is committed to providing the highest quality clinical care; educating the current and…

Health
7
Northwell Health Inc

Northwell health is the parent company of a fully integrated health system that is committed to promote clinical care, health education, conduct biomedical research, and caring for the community regardless of ability to pay.

Community Improvement
8
Beth Israel Hospital & Children's Hospital Medical Care Corporation

Pediatric healthcare, education & research

9
Sharon Strauss Parker Lymphoma Research Foundation Inc dba Life Lover Found

Funding Cancer Research

Health
10
J Walter Juckett Cancer Research Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
11
Childrens Cancer Therapy Development Institute

To make all childhood cancers universally survivable by delivering new treatments to clinical trials through scientific discovery.

12
Children's Hospital & Research Center At Oakland

The mission of children's hospital & research center at oakland is to protect and advance the health and well-being of children through clinical care, teaching and research.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and the most unlike its peers is Intertwine Arts 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

10 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. 10 of the 13 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
8/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SUNRISE DAY CAMP ASS INC — $1,307,467 · OtherSUNRISE DAY CAMP ASS INCHAPPINESS IS CAMPING — $535,000 · OtherHAPPINESS IS CAMPING+2 more — $12,500 · OtherMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER — $1,000,000 · HealthMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CAN…+2 more — $40,000 · HealthSIBS PLACE INC — $425,000 · Human ServicesSIBS PLACE INCTHE MORGAN CENTER — $350,360 · Human ServicesTHE MORGAN CENTERHOSPICE CARE NETWORK — $52,000 · Human ServicesHOSPICE CARE NETWORKBARRY & FLORENCE FRIEDBERG JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $293,000 · ReligionSTAND UP TO CANCER — $56,500 · PhilanthropyINTERTWINE ARTS INC — $22,500 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,854,967Health$1,040,000Human Services$827,360Religion$293,000Philanthropy$56,500Arts & Culture$22,500

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 budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER — $1,000,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetSIBS PLACE INC — $425,000 over 8y, 20% of budgetTHE MORGAN CENTER — $350,360 over 8y, 27% of budgetBARRY & FLORENCE FRIEDBERG JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $293,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetHOSPICE CARE NETWORK — $52,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERTWINE ARTS INC — $22,500 over 3y, 8.4% of budgetANDREA RIZZO FOUNDATION — $15,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetRonald McDonald House Charities New York Metro Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER
  • Who funds SIBS PLACE INC
  • Who funds THE MORGAN CENTER
  • Who funds BARRY & FLORENCE FRIEDBERG JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER INC
  • Who funds STAND UP TO CANCER
  • Who funds HOSPICE CARE NETWORK
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC
  • Who funds INTERTWINE ARTS INC
  • Who funds ANDREA RIZZO FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Ronald McDonald House Charities New York Metro 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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA3.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Laura Rosenberg 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%your share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–15%
    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 13 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph