· Private foundation
The Randi Rubovits-Seitz Foundation Inc
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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE | $1,000 |
| CWPV | $550 |
| NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOUNDATION | $500 |
| ELLIOTT ADVOCACY | $500 |
| SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW | $500 |
| THE HIAS FOUNDATION | $500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $500 |
| SARARA FOUNDATION | $500 |
| PROVIDE | $500 |
| GIBBON HEALTH INITIATIVE | $250 |
| WASHINGTON ENGLISH CENTER | $250 |
| HANDS ALONG THE NILE | $250 |
| JEWISH COUNCIL FOR THE AGING OF GREATER WASHINGTON | $250 |
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 (FY24–25, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 89% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 100% of The Randi Rubovits-Seitz Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 33% of the giving stays in DC; read by stated purpose it is 0% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
15 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 12 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, 56% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
- NFNature Forward2× · 2022–2023 · $8k · revenue +16%
- TWTrust Women Foundation Inc3× · 2019–2021 · $4k · revenue +29%
- PFPhysicians For Reproductive Health2× · 2020–2023 · $4k · revenue +49%
Funded once
- CFCENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTSone grant, 2023 · $3k
- OIORIENTAL INSTITUTEone grant, 2019 · $2k
- SISMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NATIONAL ZOOLOGICAL PARKone grant, 2020 · $2k
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.
The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.
We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…
To make grants to charitable organizations and programs that support the achievement of sexual and reproductive health (srh) of the poor & underprivileged women and others in the asia-pacific and elsewhere.
Women in global health (wgh) is a global movement and organization that brings together all genders and backgrounds to achieve gender equality in global health leadership.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Engenderhealth envisions a gender-equal world where all people have the agency, resources, and opportunities to live healthy lives.(see schedule o)
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
(msh) saves lives and improves the health of the world's poorest (see schedule o) and most vulnerable people by closing the gap between knowledge and action in public health.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Physicians for Human Rights Inc and the most unlike its peers is National Wildlife Federation. 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 32 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) — 13% of your grantees by number, and just 6% 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.
32 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. 32 of the 50 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 PATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds Nature Forward ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON DC INC ↗
- Who funds Trust Women Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds Physicians For Reproductive Health ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CIRCLE OF HOPE HEALTH CARE SVCS INC ↗
- Who funds PHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds Friendship Place ↗
- Who funds PROVIDE INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds HIAS INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ARTS CLUB OF WASHINGTON INC ↗
- Who funds CHELSEA'S FUND ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN JEWISH WORLD SERVICE INC ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES NATIONAL CAPITAL AREAINC ↗
- Who funds SARARA INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER WASHINGTON INC ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds ELLIOTT ADVOCACY INC ↗
- Who funds RED TENT FUND ↗
- Who funds MARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RESEARCH CENTER IN EGYPT 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.
Open a dossier: Greater Washington Community Foundation · The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Randi Rubovits-Seitz 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Hias Inc — 88% of income from government
- Nature Forward — 32% 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 Randi Rubovits-Seitz Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Randi Rubovits-Seitz Foundation Inc 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.