· Private foundation
The Paula and William Bernstein 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.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 55% of THE PAULA AND WILLIAM BERNSTEIN FAMILY FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k70 grants · $105k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $183k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $327k
- $250k+1 grant · $500k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WELLESLEY COLLEGE | $500,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA | $200,000 |
| TEMPLE EMANUEL | $76,800 |
| CLEO PARKER ROBINSON DANCE | $50,000 |
| DENVER INSTITUTE FOR PSYCHOANALYSIS - PEACS | $35,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $30,000 |
| CONGREGATION HAR HASHEM | $28,000 |
| JEWISH COLORADO | $26,800 |
| COLORADO PUBLIC RADIO | $25,000 |
| BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER | $18,000 |
| AMERICAN BOARD OF PYSCHOANALYSIS | $10,000 |
| ADL MOUNTAIN STATES REGION | $10,000 |
| WELLESLEY CENTERS FOR WOMEN | $8,500 |
| IMAGINE FOUNDATION | $8,000 |
| DENVER CHILDREN'S CHOIR | $7,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $192k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +18% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
93 repeat relationships — 74 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- WCWellesley College6× · 2020–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +42%
- TBTHE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER6× · 2020–2025 · $143k · revenue +64%
- PBPUBLIC BROADCASTING OF COLORADO INC6× · 2020–2025 · $100k · revenue +44%
Funded once
- SUSTANFORD UNIVERSITY DR ALAN YEUNGone grant, 2020 · $100k
- TVTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTERone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -34%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +137%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
Colorado open lands' mission is to preserve the significant open lands and natural heritage of colorado through private and public partnerships, innovative land conservation, and strategic leadership.
Agu's mission is to advance and support an inclusive community of earth and space scientists and partners dedicated to discovery and solutions to societal challenges. agu seeks to catalyze discovery and solutions to scientific and societal…
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
Cdp north america, inc. 's ("cdp-na") vision for the future is a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. we focus investors and companies on taking urgent action to build a truly sustainable economy by measuring…
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
We connect people, ideas, and nonprofits to make good happen. our vision is that all of jeffco is thriving.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
The mission of education commission of the states is to advocate for attaining educational excellence for all and to help state leaders identify, develop and implement public policy for education that addresses current and future needs of…
To provide essential value to our members, their careers, our partners, and the public, asce will: facilitate the advancement of technology; encourage and provide the tools for lifelong learning; promote professionalism and the profession;…
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
See schedule ouniversity corporation for atmospheric research (ucar), on behalf of, and in cooperation with its member university members, is engaged in the management of long-term atmospheric and related research and educational…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado and the most unlike its peers is Pacific Stroke Association. 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.
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 47 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
79 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 79 of the 120 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 Wellesley College ↗
- Who funds JEWISHColorado ↗
- Who funds THE BOULDER JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC BROADCASTING OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds IMAGINE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LIGHTHOUSE WRITERS WORKSHOP INC ↗
- Who funds DENVER CHILDREN'S CHOIR ↗
- Who funds DENVER ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
- Who funds CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum ↗
- Who funds SECURE COMMUNITY NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION COLORADO ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN BOARD OF PSYCHOANALYSIS ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR ADVANCED PSYCHOANALYTIC STUDIES ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds COLORADO MUSIC FESTIVAL & CENTER FOR MUSICAL ARTS ↗
- Who funds ENERGY OUTREACH COLORADO ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF DENVER ↗
- Who funds LUCY DANIELS CENTER FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD ↗
- Who funds COACHING CORPS ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Colorado Gives Foundation · Rose Community Foundation · The Denver Foundation · Amg Charitable Gift Foundation · Schlessman Foundation Inc · Western Union Foundation · Aspen Community Foundation · Gates Family Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Mesdag Family Foundation · Alpenglow Foundation · Brady 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 Paula and William Bernstein Family 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.
- Learning Ally Inc — 4% of income from government
- Wellesley College — 1% of income from government
- Oxfam-America Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Paula and William Bernstein Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Paula and William Bernstein 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.