· Private foundation
THE RINDNER FAMILY FOUNDATION co SHELLEY RINDNER
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: 84% of THE RINDNER FAMILY FOUNDATION co SHELLEY RINDNER’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 $10k26 grants · $42k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $72k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| YOUNG ISRAEL OF MONSEY | $22,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| CONGREGATION AHAVAS CHESED TORAH | $15,000 |
| KOLLEL ANSHEI BRIARWOOD | $10,000 |
| TOMCHE SHABBOS OF ROCKLAND | $10,000 |
| THE ALEPH INSTITUTE | $6,800 |
| OUR PLACE IN NEW YORK | $5,000 |
| YESHIVA KETANA | $4,000 |
| ILAN HIGH SCHOOL | $3,600 |
| COLEL CHABAD | $2,800 |
| BAIS MEDRASH L'TORAH | $2,300 |
| HATZOLOH EMS OF ROCKLAND COUNTY | $2,026 |
| BETTER FUTURE FOR ISRAEL | $2,000 |
| THE SHUL | $1,800 |
| MATZDIKIM | $1,800 |
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 (FY17–25, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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.
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 +22% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 16 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, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $31k 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
- TATHE ALEPH INSTITUTE INC6× · 2017–2025 · $37k · revenue +123%
- IHILAN HIGH SCHOOL5× · 2021–2025 · $22k · revenue +22%
- KTKOSHER TROOPS INC4× · 2020–2025 · $5k · revenue +65%
Funded once
- BPBEN PORAT YOSEF INCone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +20%
- NNYUone grant, 2017 · $5k
- NHNOAM HATORAHone grant, 2021 · $5k
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.
Religious School
A post-secondary school offering an educational program in talmudic study
To further religious jewish education for children and young adults in israel both directly, by using advanced education methods, and indirectly, by supporting the development of future teachers by subsidizing their education and training.…
The school trains advanced talmudic scholars, enabling them to become high level teachers and religious leaders in israel and the united states using specific methodology combining traditional talmudic study with innovative learning…
The organization provides financial assistance to victims of acts of terrorism in the state of israel.
To enhance jewish education for children in israel by developing advanced educational methods, focusing on the building of personal relationships with the students to ensure that the needs of each individual are met. every child can be…
Jewish educational programs
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ben Porat Yosef Inc and the most unlike its peers is Dorot Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 27 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 77 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 THE ALEPH INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds ILAN HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds BEN PORAT YOSEF INC ↗
- Who funds KOSHER TROOPS INC ↗
- Who funds Tzohar Halev Inc ↗
- Who funds OUR PLACE IN NY INC ↗
- Who funds BETTER FUTURE FOR ISRAEL ↗
- Who funds DOROT INC ↗
- Who funds BAIS MEDRASH L'TORAH A NJ NONPROFIT CORP ↗
- Who funds DAAS MEISHARIM ↗
- Who funds GUARDIANS OF THE SICK INC ↗
- Who funds HATZOLOH EMS INC ↗
- Who funds KOLEL CHIBAS JERUSALEM ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds American Friends of Migdal OHR ↗
- Who funds MATZDIKIM ↗
- Who funds NE EMAN FOUNDATION USA ↗
- Who funds Seattle Hebrew Academy ↗
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: The Ojc Fund · Jewish Communal Fund · Allen I Gross Charitable Foundation · Cross River Community Foundation · Zichron Chaim Charity Fund · Jewish Federation of Cleveland · Fjc · Jack Adjmi Family Foundation Inc · David & Chaya Zahler Foundation Inc · The Foundation for Hope · Kitov Foundation · The Weiskopf Family 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 RINDNER FAMILY FOUNDATION co SHELLEY RINDNER 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.
- The Aleph Institute 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.