Skip to content
The Nancy & Miles Rubin Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Nancy & Miles Rubin Foundation

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$4k
Granted FY2020
1
Grants FY2020
1
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

International$142kPublic Benefit$70kHealth$55kArts & Culture$30kEducation$26kPhilanthropy$15kCrime & Legal$15kCivil Rights$10kOther$0
02FY2020 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,537
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA$3,537
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 (FY17–17, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GO CAMPAIGN: $2k → 14%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

IL
NY
MA
OH
CA
CO
MD
DC
GA
TX
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.

29%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$103k · 7 repeat orgs$252k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2020, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
66

Total granted

$103k
$249k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+48%

Still filing today

100%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
InternationalHealthArts & CultureEducationSocial ScienceCrime & LegalOther
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

  • DH
    DIDI HIRSCH PSYCHIATRIC SERVICE
    2× · 2017–2018 · $50k · revenue +81%
  • WF
    WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL
    2× · 2017–2018 · $21k · revenue +41%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF NEVE SHALOMWAHAT AL-SALAM INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $8k · revenue +164%

Funded once

  • ND
    NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS
    one grant, 2017 · $60k · revenue -3%
  • PC
    PACIFIC COUNCIL ON INT
    one grant, 2017 · $16k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $13k
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
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
2
International Crisis Group

Crisis group works to prevent and resolve deadly conflict around the world by informing and influencing the perceptions and actions of policymakers and other key conflict actors. to this end, we endeavour to talk to all sides and provide…

International
3
Us Middle East Project Inc

The organization's mission is to engage in non partisan analysis of u.s. foreign policy in the middle east, with special emphasis on the middle east peace process, and to present policymakers in the united states, in the region and in the…

International
4
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.

—
5
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
6
Washington Office On Latin America

To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.

International
7
Observer Research Foundation America

Organization mission the observer research foundation america orf america is an independent, non-partisan, and nonprofit organization in washington dc dedicated to addressing policy challenges facing the united states, india, and their…

International
8
Los Angeles World Affairs Council and Town Hall

The organization is a non-partisan, membership based speakers' forum that connects business leaders, community members, and engaged individuals with shared interest in local, national, and global affairs. it provides an open and accessible…

International
9
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
10
American Law Institute

The institute's mission, as set out in its certificate of incorporation, is to promote the clarification and simplification of the law and its better adaptation to social needs, to secure the better administration of justice, and to…

Crime & Legal
11
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
12
The Leadership Foundation

The leadership foundation, inc. (the foundation), established in 1990, is the mechanism by which iwf members advance the next generation of women leaders. the foundation accelerates the careers of top-performing women by offering…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Aspen Institute Inc; the most unlike its peers is The J Paul Getty Trust. 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

44 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 44 of the 80 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
44/44
Grantees still filing
32/44
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS: $60,000 · InternationalNATIONAL DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL…NEW ISRAEL FUND: $55,000 · InternationalNEW ISRAEL FUNDWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $20,720 · InternationalWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONALHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $17,000 · InternationalHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INCJ STREET: $10,000 · InternationalJ STREETKOUNKUEY DESIGN INITIATIVE INC: $7,000 · International+6 more: $16,683 · International+6 morePACIFIC COUNCIL ON INT: $15,585 · OtherPACIFIC COUNCIL ON INTIndividual grant recipient: $13,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPEOPLE FOR THE AMERICA: $10,000 · OtherPEOPLE FOR THE AMERICAIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAMERICAN FRIENDS OF NEVE SHALOMWAHAT AL-SALAM INC: $7,500 · OtherUNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEM MU: $5,000 · OtherIKAR: $5,000 · OtherUNITED FRIENDS OF CHILDREN: $5,000 · OtherThe Rome Chamber Music Festival Inc: $5,000 · OtherTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 · Other+43 more: $66,754 · Other+43 moreDIDI HIRSCH PSYCHIATRIC SERVICE: $50,000 · HealthDIDI HIRSCH PS…+4 more: $4,988 · Health+4 moreTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $11,000 · EducationMARINA ORTH FOUNDATION: $2,000 · EducationNORTHSIDE CENTER FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT INC: $2,000 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATION: $2,000 · EducationTHE ROOSEVELT INSTITUTE: $1,000 · EducationBRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: $1,000 · EducationNEW VENTURE FUND: $15,000 · EnvironmentPARTNERS FOR JUSTICE INC: $10,000 · Crime & LegalSHRIVER CENTER ON POVERTY LAW: $1,000 · Crime & LegalTHE J PAUL GETTY TRUST: $10,000 · Philanthropy
International$186,403Other$147,839Health$54,988Education$19,000Environment$15,000Crime & Legal$11,000Philanthropy$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATIONAL DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS: $60,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEW ISRAEL FUND: $55,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetDIDI HIRSCH PSYCHIATRIC SERVICE: $50,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $20,720 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $17,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJ STREET: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPARTNERS FOR JUSTICE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetTHE J PAUL GETTY TRUST: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF NEVE SHALOMWAHAT AL-SALAM INC: $7,500 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetKOUNKUEY DESIGN INITIATIVE INC: $7,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS FIRST: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Rome Chamber Music Festival Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetNEW JEWISH NARRATIVE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $3,600 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHOLOCAUST MUSEUM LA: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGo Campaign: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHSIDE CENTER FOR CHILD DEVELOPMENT INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN'S RIGHTS: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJohn Burton Advocates for Youth: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLOS ANGELES ALLIANCE FOR A NEW ECONOMY: $1,650 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOS ANGELES CONSERVATION CORPS: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR LAW & JUSTICE INC: $1,500 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetARMAND HAMMER MUSEUM OF ART AND CULTURAL CENTER INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEVERY MOTHER COUNTS: $1,088 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe United States Holocaust Memorial Museum: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHRIVER CENTER ON POVERTY LAW: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMS FOUNDATION FOR WOMEN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBRANDEIS UNIVERSITY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWOODLEY HOUSE INC: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC: $683 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA PLACE CALLED HOME: $528 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DRUG DISCOVERY FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKIDS IN NEED OF DEVELOPMENT EDUCATION AND RELIEF KINDER USA: $500 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.

Jewish Community Fede…Jewish Community Foun…Jewish Communal FundThe California Wellne…National Philanthropi…California Community …Tides FoundationSilicon Valley Commun…Vanguard Charitable E…Renaissance Charitabl…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…
Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & SonomaCA18.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Jewish Communal Fund · The California Wellness Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · California Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Nancy & Miles Rubin Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Nancy & Miles Rubin Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 9%
  • Brandeis University: 9% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 Nancy & Miles Rubin Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Nancy & Miles Rubin 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 80 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Nancy & Miles Rubin’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