Loading…
· Private foundation
The Rabinovitch Foundation
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
$163k
Granted FY2024
12
Grants
5
Communities
$55k
Largest
01What you fund
0161% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Youth Development$473kEnvironment$70kPhilanthropy$50kRecreation & Sports$38kHealth$22kHousing & Shelter$2kOther$424k
02FY2024 · 12 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k4 grants · $19k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $89k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $55k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$3.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
- JEWISH BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS$55,000
- Israel ParaSport Center$27,500
- FOUNDATION FOR CAMP BOB WALDORF$11,000
- Shalom Institute - Shemesh Farms$10,000
- THE CARBON UNDERGROUND$10,000
- American Friends of Israel Navy Sea$10,000
- Jewish Communal Fund$10,000
- THE MACCABI USASPORTS FOR ISRAEL$10,000
- Senior Concerns Adult Daycare Fund$5,000
- Hirshberg Foundation$5,000
- PJ LIBRARY$5,000
- CONCERN FOUNDATION$4,000
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:
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 12%. 97% of your dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
92%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$990k · 13 repeat orgs$89k to everyone else
13 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
13
9
Total granted
$990k
$79k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+10%
+48%
Still filing today
46%
11%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
PhilanthropyHealthYouth DevelopmentEnvironmentRecreation & SportsHousing & ShelterOther
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
- TCTHE CARBON UNDERGROUND8× · 2017–2024 · $70k · revenue +10%
- CFCONCERN FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2024 · $40k · revenue +30%
- OHOUR HOUSE GRIEF SUPPORT CENTER5× · 2017–2021 · $17k · revenue +46%
Funded once
- LALOS ANGELES JEWISH HOMEone grant, 2017 · $25k
- HIHillel Internationalone grant, 2023 · $10k
- CCCA Community Fnd - Wildfire Reliefone grant, 2018 · $10k
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
The Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation
The jonsson cancer center foundation is the single most important vehicle for raising private funds for cancer research at ucla. please see schedule o.
—
2
Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles
The foundation is the largest manager of charitable assets and leader in planned giving solutions for greater los angeles jewish philanthropists through its various programs.
Philanthropy
3
Jewish Family Service of Los Angeles
We provide life-improving services that help the people of los angeles live with dignity and exercise self-determination. we believe in and strive for a more compassionate los angeles where no one has to navigate life alone.
Human Services
4
Jewish Federation Council of Greater La
Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…
Philanthropy
5
The Jewish Fund
To support the health care needs of the jewish community and the broader detroit community. to further positive relations between the jewish community and the city of detroit.
Philanthropy
6
Ucla Foundation
The mission of the ucla foundation is to actively promote philanthropy and manage donated resources for the advancement of ucla.
Education
7
Museum Associates
To serve the public through the collection, conservation, exhibition and interpretation of significant works of art from a broad range of cultures and historical periods, and through translation of these collections into meaningful…
Arts & Culture
8
Chelsea Jewish Lifecare Inc
To manage a continuum of senior care business lines.
Health
9
The Helene & Louis Galen Family Foundation
Giving supports the jewish community and programs that have an emphasis on health & medical research, education & children, arts & culture, social services and jewish causes.
—
10
Sandler Foundation
Supports charitable, educational, & religious purposes of jewish comm federation of sf.
Philanthropy
11
The Abrasba Foundation
Provide funding for organizations to promote and provide charitable and educational programs and services.
Philanthropy
12
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
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Los Angeles Mission Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Carbon Underground. 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
9 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Youth Development$473,207Other$423,800Environment$70,000Philanthropy$50,000Recreation & Sports$37,800Health$22,000Housing & Shelter$2,000
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 JEWISH BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS ↗
- Who funds THE CARBON UNDERGROUND ↗
- Who funds CONCERN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR CAMP BOB WALDORF ↗
- Who funds OUR HOUSE GRIEF SUPPORT CENTER ↗
- Who funds Jewish Communal Fund ↗
- Who funds The First Tee of Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds JOHN WAYNE CANCER INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Los Angeles Mission ↗
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.
Jewish Community Foundation of Los AngelesCA15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · California Community Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 organisation The Rabinovitch 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
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: THE CARBON UNDERGROUND.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
insufficient risk
Limited financial data in public filings.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 465582094 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on THE CARBON UNDERGROUND, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue held over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 13% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to The Rabinovitch Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Rabinovitch Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines